<iN NATURE

CONSERVANCY COUNCIL

Earth science, conservation

f--+--''r'--.------------ No. 24 March 1988 -------------­

I " ..~ ,

'" ....~ '" .. _...................w

~

Earth science conservation is the journal of the Earth Science Division of the Nature Conservancy Council Correspondence and comments should be addressed to Dr Des O'Halloran, The Editor, Earth Science Division, Nature Conservancy CounciL Northminster House, Peterborough PEl lUA. Telephone (0733) 40345.

The Nature Conservancy Council would like to thank all those who have assisted in the task of promoting earth SClence conservation

The opmions expressed by the contributors to Earth science conservation are not necessarily those of the Nature Conservancy Council

Contents

Editorial 5

General features Geologist appointed as the new NCC Assistant Chief Scientist 7 GeolOgical conservation emphasis at Peterborough Museum 7 Cave conservation and show cave development 9 Restoration blasting - a novel quarry restoration technique 12 The eroding coastline - coastal protection and conservatIon 14

Invited feature The role of geology in the school curriculum 19

Geological Conservation Review Progress on GCR site selection 24 Publication plans for the GCR 26 The second GCR contributors meeting a report 27

SSSI notification and denotification Progress on SSSI notification 28 SSSI denotification 28

Public Inquiries Morrich More Public Inquiry result 34

Major casework The NCC wins Chesil Beach court case 35 Cliff collapse endangers apartment block 35 River diversion to save Quaternary section 37 Coastal protection threat to Northumberland Quaternary site 37 Ballantrae road works monitored 37 Threat to Tertiary palaeontological site 38 Cretaceous brachiopod site protected 38 Impasse over Welsh Pleistocene site 39 Bishopstone Cliffs agreement in jeopardy 39

Site management Site clearance 41 Site access 41

Site-related research Holywell Coombe rescue excavation 43 Cambridge Greensand - a gap in the GCR coverage 45 Recent palaeontological discoveries on GCR sites 45

Field education New Burrator and Wenlock Edge trails published 46 Public participation in geological conservation 46 Geological site description sheets 47

Conservation news Earth sCIence conservation in Roumania 48 BGS announces 1988 Open Day dates 48 Brownend Quarry becomes nature reserve 48

Earth science conservation - index for issues 1 to 23 50

3

Editorial With the appearance of this issue we maintain our schedule of producing two issues of Earth science conservation per year. The new format adopted in the last issue has been generally welcomed by our readers, but we intend to keep up our attempts to further improve the presentation. Some readers criticised the closely-set typeface used in the text, and will, we hope. be relieved to see us adopting a less optically demanding version in this issue. We would also like to apologise for a number of mis-spellings which crept into some items included at a late stage in preparing the text, and which we failed to pick up at the proof stage. This was especially true of page 22 where, to my embarrassment as an igneous petrologist, the term igneous appeared in no less than three different spellings in the course of one line I

Turning to more serious considerations, Earth science conservation is, to the best of our knowledge, the only scientific journal in the world concerned solely with matters of geological conservation. AB such it is a unique information source on the interface between earth science conservation on the one hand, and development and resource exploitation on the oth~,

Hitherto it has not been easy for readers to trace the evolution of specific case histories and other recurring themes through successive back issues, This problem has become particularly acute since Issue 19 when the journal began to increase substantially in length of issues, and the inclusion of a retrospective geographical site index in Issue 21 only went some way towards addressing this difficulty. For this reason we have compiled a more complete index for Issues 1 to 23 inclusive and included it with this issue. The index is in four parts covering geographical, geological ami subject areas, along with a listing of featured articles. We will update the index periodically in the future.

In this issue we report on a welcome emphasis on the geological aspects of natural history in the proposed new gallery at Peterborough Museum, as a reminder that the NCC's commitment to conservation is not confined to SSSIs and NNRs, but extends, to an increasing degree, into the wider environment We also focus in this issue on the recurring topics of cave conservation and coastal protection, which are two difficult areas of pressure on geological conservation. We continue the journal's tradition of including invited features by external contributors, with a timely article on the role of geology in secondary education, Although this may not seem immediately relevant to the work of the NCC, we consider that schools are of critical importance for two reasons, Firstly, because school parties are one of the largest user groups of field localities, and secondly, because of the opportunities available in schools of influencing the attitudes of future generations to our geological heritage and the importance of conserving it for posterity.

AB we go to press, plans, involving the NCC, to selectively control the encroachment of scrub over parts of Cheddar Gorge SSSI are receiving much publicity on television and in the national press. We will report on the biological and geomorphological aspects of these proposals in the October issue of this journal.

Dr Des O'Halloran Editor

5

General features

Geologist appointed as the new NeC Assistant Chief Scientist

From 1February 1988 Dr Keith Duff has been appointed as Assistant Chief Scientist (Earth and Marine Sciences), based at the NCC's Peterborough headquarters. The responsibilities of this post cover the earth and marine SClences together with coastal ecology, toxic chemicals and pollution. The position carries responsibility for sixteen permanent scientific staff, ten of whom are earth scientists. Responsibility for the Chief Scientist Directorate's other principal areas of activity, the terrestrial and freshwater sciences, rests with John Blackwood, the NCC's other Assistant Chief Scientist

Dr Duff is the first geologist to be appointed to a senior management post in the NCC and his appointment, which is warmly welcomed by NCC staff, will be well received in geological circles

Keith, who is 38 years of age, is an invertebrate palaeontologist with a specialist interest in the Callovian faunas of the Oxford Clay. Since joining the NCC in January 1975 he has concentrated on the safeguarding of SSSIs and the application of planning law to earth science conservation. In recognition of this work he was appointed Head of Earth Science Conservation within the NCC in September 1986. Over the years Keith has become a well-known figure in the geological community for his conservation work, and he is a member of the Conservation Committee of the Geological Society of London. Between 1978 and .1982 he was Field Meetings Secretary of the Geologist's Association, and a Vice-President from 1982-1985. He is currently on the Editorial Board of Geology Today, is a Council member of the Institution of Geologists, and a member of both the Palaeontological Association and the Palaeontographical Society

Following upon his promotion it is expected that there will be a number of changes in responsibilities within the Earth Science Division over the coming months, and we will report on these in the next issue of Earth science conservation.

7

Geological conservation emphasis at Peterborough Museum

Plans have been announced for a major new gallery featuring geology and wildlife at Peterborough Museum The geology displays will open in June 1989 and it is hoped that the wildlife displays will be opened in 1990. The gallery will focus on aspects of the past, present and future of Peterborough's natural environment and, by reference to local SSSIs and NNRs, will incorporate a welcome emphasis on the natural heritage of this rapidly developing area. Hitherto there has not been a proper gallery devoted to these subjects and it is hoped that the new gallery will be an imaginative and innovative means of plugging the gap, It is designed primarily to display some of the best specimens from the museum's natural science collections and star exhibits will be skeletons of marine reptiles collected from the local brick pits.

The scheme, which is receiving grant-aid from the NCC,.is intended as the first stage in a major re-development of the entire museum which should make a significant contribution to the attractiveness of the City of Peterborough, The new gallery is being constructed on the first floor of the museum, in three adjoining rooms with a total floor area of 160m2

. Exhibits will be organised on a one-way through-flow layout and will be designed to facilitate maximlJill use by school parties, The account given below describes the main features as the visitor proceeds through the gallery

First, the visitor passes through a small introductory lobby, where the major themes of the gallery are briefly outlined. The vast timescale of geological history and the interdependence of biology and geology are among these themes, as is the great speed of changes due to human activity as compared with other agencies,

The visitor then enters a large area designed to convey the impression that he or she is submerged under the warm, tropical sea which covered the area during the Jurassic Period of some 150 million years ago, Around the walls are mounted skeletons of some of the animals which swam in this sea, Prime amongst these is the almost complete skeleton of the Dogsthorpe plesiosaur, donated to the museum by the London Brick Company

in 1987. Another exhibit is a five metre long crocodile, while at other points are ichthyosaurs and various forms of fishes. A further display is devoted to ammonites, belemnites and other fossils found in the Peterborough area. There is ample provision for schools' use of the displays and here - as elsewhere in the gallery ­specimens are available for handling and the text is also on audio tape for those with reading difficulties,

A special panel is devoted to geological conservation and explains the role of the museum in recording site information and preserving specimens with their associated field data In recent years the museum staff, working with local amateur geologists, have been able to keep a watching brief on geological sites and to record, collect and preserve fossils as and when they have been exposed, Local geological sites are almost all man-made, being mainly brick pits in the Oxford Clay and gravel pits in the Ice Age river gravels, Indeed, without these pits our knowledge of Peterborough geology would be incomparably poorer; as it is, the marine reptiles from Peterborough brick pits make the area world famous to geologists. It is therefore in the interests of science that the brick and gravel industries stay in business for as long as possible! This is especially the case since the brick pits flood rapidly once they become disused and consequently are ill suited to conservation by means of

~

designation as SSSIs. Careful re-development of worked out pits is also stressed in the gallery. Disused brickpits can be reclaimed by infilling with refuse or power station fly-ash, eventually to revert to land for agriculture or other development, while old gravel pits can become valuable wildlife and recreational facilities, The concept of landscape management for maximum all-round benefit is the central message,

The excavation of the plesiosaur skeleton, referred to above, is used to illustrate modem fossil collection techniques. Photographs illustrate how the skeleton was first mapped in detail as it lay in the ground, then carefully jacketed in plaster ready for transportation. It was then taken in manageable sections to the museum where it could be worked on under ideal conditions, Each bone was cleaned, repaired as necessary and individually numbered ready for display. Some of the skeleton was preserved in limestone nodules, which were carefully dissolved in acetic acid at Leicester University by Mr Alan Dawn to reveal the bones and any hard contents of the creature's stomach. The skull was preserved in soft clay, and was prepared by Dr Arthur Cruickshank using the facilities of Leicestershire Museum Service

The visitor then takes a massive leap forward in time and enters the Ice Age section of the gallery, Here the

rather fragmentary story of Peterborough's natural history during the last one million years is told. The alternation of warm and cold spells, and their characteristic fossil remains, for instance the woolly mammoth and hippopotamus respectively, are used as illustrations of the fine balance of our ecosystem and the perturbations it is subject to, The extinction of the woolly mamm9th about 10,000 years ago is tentatively linked to human 'overkill' to stress the rapidity of man-made changes in the environment A life-size model of a Palaeolithic 'hunter-gatherer' is used to show that humans arrived in Peterborough tens of thousands of years before the present day.

Recent studies of plants and arthropods at Ice Age sites near Peterborough, Maxey and Eye Gravel Pit SSSI are featured in the display, Concepts conveyed include the use of sediments and fossils to reconstruct past environments, the migrations of animals and the succession of plant communities as climate fluctuates,

Woodwalton Fen NNR is featured next, as a large panoramic diorama illustrating the evolution of the fenlands, A large map of the fens shows how the coastline of the Wash area has moved back and forth over the last 5,000 years, This graphically illustrates the importance of water in the landscape and the profound impact on the area of post-glacial sea-level changes, together with in more recent centuries man-made drainage.

Another large diorama shows the woodland and farmland to the west of Peterborough, on the limestone ridges which stand above the fen to the east The enormous changes wrought in this landscape by enclosure in the early nineteenth century are conveyed by quotes from John Clare, the 'peasant poet', who was the first true naturalist to describe the Peterborough area.

The gallery then brings the story up to the present day and beyond. Drainage and over-intensive farming are responsible for today's rather monotonous fens, with their rapidly shrinking peat cover and impoverished fauna and flora, The extinction of the large copper butterfly graphically portrays the fragility of this ecosystem. Mineral extraction has left large scars on the Peterborough landscape, while development of the city threatens many sites of wildlife interest to the north and west. The future can be made an optimistic one, however, if only the same ingenuity which drained the fens can be turned towards conservation.

The final area of the gallery is intended to be a flexible resource, and is fitted with space for temporary exhibits, handling sessions and so on. In this area a variety of conservation issues relevant to Peterborough are discussed, the emphasis being on human responsibility for the natural environment. Suggestions are made as to what the individual can do, both to

conserve and to enjoy the countryside. The Ferry Meadows country park, only a few miles from the museum, is mentioned as the obvious place for people to begin their explorations. Local groups such as the Peterborough Wildlife Group can use this last part of the gallery to put on their own displays or for meetings, and it is thus hoped that the museum will act as a focus for local environmental interests,

The gallery will, upon completion, represent the efforts and financial support from many quarters. Haley Sharpe Associates are the designers for the project, and funding is by Peterbor~)llghCity Council and several other bodies, The largest grant towards the project is from the NCC, and grant applications are also being considered by the Countryside Commission and by the Geologists' Association, while the Area Museums Service for South Eastern England is grant-aiding the cost of conserving and mounting the Oxford Clay vertebrate skeletons, It is also hoped that commercial sponsors will be found to help enhance the budget

Cave conservation and show cave development

Introduction

During the past two years, three major show cave developments have been proposed at sites selected for cave geomorphology by the Geological Conservation Review. Two of these, at White Scar Caves and Bar Pot, have arisen within the long-standing Ingleborough SSSI whilst the third, at Fairy Cave Quarry in the Mendip Hills, lies within a site first recommended by the GCR and subsequently notified as an SSSI in 1986. These developments have presented special problems of cave conservation and have sometimes provoked a strong reaction within the caving world, Each cave is distinctly different and illustrates different aspects of the problems of balancing the desire to explore and develop the underground environment with the need to conserve the features of special interest and great beauty found there, The three caves are reviewed below,

Fairy Cave Quarry

This quarry lies within the St Dunstan's Well Catchment SSSI in Somerset, near the eastern end of the Mendip Hills. Fairy Cave itself has a natural entrance on the hillside and was first explored at least 80 years ago. Quarrying for limestone started in the 1920s but large-scale operations did not begin until after the Second World War, From the 1950s onwards the workings revealed and subsequently destroyed a series of caves which were explored and recorded by members of the Cerberus SpeleolOgical Society CCSS). Some ofthe caves were decorated with speleothem

-.

...........

••1. .~

AA~"'~""

8 9

formations of outstanding beauty but many were sadly lost as quarrying advanced within a large area with planning permission for mineral extraction. In the 1970s however, the effect of quarrying on the underground drainage networks and important local water supplies led the Wessex Water Authority to oppose any further extension of planning permission. As a consequence, the quarrying activity gradually ceased as the permitted area became worked out.

Calcite formations in Shatter Cave, Fairy Cave Quarry, Somerset.

Fortunately, the quarry workings had not destroyed all the caves and a number of exceptional passages have survived. In 1986, the NCC were consulted over a planning application by the quarry operators, Hobbs Holdings Limited, for the development of the passage known as Shatter Cave as a public show cave, as part of a larger scheme for the development of a leisure complex. Caving organisations, including CSS, and the NCC considered the proposals and put forward detailed comments. The NCC did not object to this development in principle but strongly urged the planning authority, Mendip District Council, to impose detailed and comprehensive conditions if planning permission were granted. In fact, the District Council deferred the decision and recommended that detailed negotiations should be held between the developers and the NCe. These negotiations have continued now for over a year and agreement has been reached over many detailed issues of principle. To establish a binding agreement over the nature of the development it now seems likely that a legal agreement through Section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971

will be needed and this possibility is now being investigated with the District Council.

Shatter Cave presents special problems as a show cave development which would challenge the ingenuity of anyone trying to allow safe public access without damaging or destroying the very features which make the cave so special. The passage is narrow and winding and frequently decorated by beautiful stalactites or stalagmites. In one section the passage is blocked by a massive boulder choke with, at present, only a narrow crawl through. In this situation, the key questions are how to open a footpath through the cave with the minimum of disturbance and, if this can be done, how to protect the fragile formations from accidental or deliberate damage by visitors. If this development eventually goes ahead, scientific monitoring of the cave will be a long-term requirement to ensure that the flow of visitors is not causing slow but cumulative damage.

White Scar Caves

White Scar Caves is an established show cave on the western flank of Ingleborough. The present show cave consists mainly of a large natural active streamway which carries water draining from Ingleborough Common The streamway is decorated in places with flowstone including some small gours and stalactites. This cave, running in the basal beds of the Carboniferous Limestone, is a classic example of an unconformity cave and is quoted in many textbooks. Beyond the upper reaches of the active streamway are abandoned high level passages recording the early development of the system. One particular passage, known as Battlefield Chamber, is renowned for its scale, beauty and spectacular formations. At present, reaching this chamber involves traversing an underground lake, Long Stop Lake, and squeezing through a tight, muddy entrance, restricting access to experienced cavers only.

During 1986 the cave owners applied for planning permission to extend the existing show cave into Battlefield Chamber by drilling and blasting a new tunnel from the downstream end of the lake. This would, however, have generated a large quantity of debris for disposal. On cost grounds the owners argued that this could not be removed from the cave and suggested instead that it should be dumped in the lake. However, the NCC and the Council of Northern Caving Clubs argued that the lake was one of the prime features of interest and should not be used for dumping.

In March 1987 a meeting was held at White Scar Caves to discuss this problem and an alternative method of spoil disposal was proposed, avoiding Long Stop Lake. It was suggested that the spoil should be used to construct a pathway which would be required to connect the new tunnel to the end of the present show cave path. This solution was acceptable to all parties.

The objective of the tunnelling exercise is to provide access for the public to Battlefield Chamber. As at Fairy Cave Quarry the NCC raised no objections in principle to this proposal but concern was expressed about some of the fragile formations in the chamber, including unusual layered mud floors. These could be easily damaged unless development of the chamber, including pathways, railings, steps, lighting and so on were carried out with great care. However, it was clear that these details could not be finalised until the tunnel was completed, to allow easy access for detailed surveying and the preparation of plans. It was therefore agreed that the tunnelling work could be granted planning permission with the deferment of detailed planning of the design of developments inside the chamber. These details would be the subject of further consultations after the completion of the tunnel. On this basis, planning permission was granted in April 1987; subsequently it has been announced by the operators that the development will not take place due to lack of funds.

Bar Pot

In May 1987 the operators of the Ingleborough Show Cave applied for planning permission for the construction of scaffolding structures within Bar Pot, an entrance to the Gaping Ghyll Cave System on the south side of Ingleborough Common near Clapham Bottoms. The purpose of this development was to allow access for adventure caving on a commercial basis.

The Gaping Ghyll Cave System is generally regarded as the best known cave in Britain and forms an important part of the Ingleborough SSSL Bar Pot is the most commonly used entrance to the system, consisting of a large open pot hole leading to a 13m vertical shaft and a second 33m shaft. It connects to South East Passage, a major outlet from Gaping Ghyll itself which is often flooded after heavy rain The Gaping Ghyll Cave System includes a wide variety of passages, some very ancient, with a history going back at least 350,000 years, and some with important mud, sand and gravel deposits

The NCC considered very carefully these proposals and raised objections on a number of grounds. Firstly the construction of scaffolding inside Bar Pot would directly damage the shafts and would create a gross and permanent intrusion into a natural and scientifically significant part of the Gaping Ghyll Cave System. Secondly the development would lead to a large increase in the usage of the cave system and would introduce large numbers of non-cavers throughout the year Usage of this system is already considerable and a large increase as proposed would be likely to lead to a corresponding increase in damage. Thirdly, the creation of an easy access route into the Gaping Ghyll System would inevitably lead to pressure for further development of the recreational potential of these

caves; the means of controlling this future development is not at all clear since no further physical works would be required and planning permission might not be required.

This development proposal created a storm of controversy within the caving world and, to some extent, this has not yet died down; there is no doubt, however, that there is widespread opposition to the scheme. Numerous other issues were raised by the proposal including safety, amenity, sporting and so on, which generally lie outside the remit of the NCe. However, the NCC has placed on record its support for the views on these issues put forward by the responsible caving organisations such as the National Caving Association (NCA) and the British Cave Research Association (BCRA), as many of these issues are indirectly relevant to the long-term conservation of the cave system.

Gaping Ghyli, Main Chamber, Ingleborough.

In October 1987 a meeting was held at Clapham Information Centre for discussion of this proposed development, involving representatives of the Yorkshire Dales National Park, the Council of Northern Caving Clubs, the BCRA, the NCC and the developers At this meeting it was suggested and agreed that the planning application would be temporarily withdrawn and a meeting should be arranged to discuss the wider issue of the development of a man-made access route

10 11

to the Gaping Ghyll Cave System, in the hope that a compromise scheme could be devised. This second meeting took place in November 1987 and a fresh proposal was devised, involving the excavation of an entirely new entrance by tunnelling from Clapham Bottoms. AB yet this scheme is no more than an idea and has not been formally submitted to the planning authority. However it may help to resolve some of the controversy that has ansen over this development.

Conclusions

These three examples demonstrate the variety and complexity of issues raised by show cave developments. They also illustrate that the NCC approaches each proposal with an open mind and does not object in principle to underground developments for the purposes of public access. In addition these cases have shown very clearly the need to improve contact and communications between the three main parties - the show cave operators, the caving community and the NCe.

Restoration blasting - a novel quarry restoration technique

The NCC, in liaison with the Department of the Environment, is exploring ways of supporting research into a novel restoration technique called restoration blasting. The technique has been progressively developed since 1984 by Dr John Gunn and Mr Peter Gagen of the Departrnen~of Environmental and Geographical Studies at Manchester Polytechnic, and is aimed at developing, in disused limestone quarries, a landscape which will harmonise with the surrounding semi-natural landscape. The summary below is based on a feasability study commissioned by the NCe.

Comparatively few gemorphological studies have addressed the rate and impact of human erosion, by means of quarrying, on the landscape. The first, and still the most comprehensive attempt to quantify human denudation was made by Sherlock (1922) in his seminal book Man as a geological agent. He paid little attention to limestone quarrying, no doubt because of its relatively minor impact at the time. It was not until Dearden (1963) that the first attempt to quantify the removal of limestone froo the Peak District was made. He concluded, on the basis of data for 1954, that human actions were about seventy times more rapid than natural processes. Since 1954 the rate of limestone extraction has increased by more than 300 per cent reaching a peak during the period 1969-1983. In that fifteen year period over 286 million tonnes of limestone were removed from the Peak District by quarrying as compared to an estimated 15 million tonnes removed in solution.

Quarrying can have a major impact, in both social and economic terms, on a locale during the extractive phase, but its long-term legacy is the conspicuous, engineered appearance of the quarried rock faces which remain after working has ceased. From a geomorphological perspective these faces may be viewed as created landscapes which will evolve under the influence of natural processes. From a planning point of view, however, quarries are generally viewed as eyesores which detract from the quality of a landscape, and are seen as detrimental on amenity grounds. Mineral Planning Authorities are increasingly taking advantage of the powers bestowed on them by the Minerals Act 1981 to specify strict restoration conditions when granting planning permission for extraction. This is particularly true in the Peak District, which produces 25% of the UK's quarried limestone, and lies largely within a National Park noted for its natural beauty and landscape character.

The research at Manchester Polytechnic aims to investigate the evolution of quarry faces in order to make a contribution to the interpretation and rehabilitation of the quarried landscape. AB part of this, a technique of restoration blasting is being developed to modify abandoned faces and restore quarry profiles to a sequence of landforms, which not only mimic those of a natural daleside, but which will evolve in a predictable manner through the agency of natural processes.

The research to date has focused on eleven abandoned quarries in Great Rocks Dale, a dry valley 3 km east of Buxton and running for some 5 km north-west to south-east. The criteria for quarry selection were ­

• Age - time since active working ceased

• Methods of working - especially drilling' and blasting methods.

• Size - area of working and height of faces.

• Overall end-form and topographic situation within the dale.

• Availability of quarry working records - this requirement was easily met as rCI plc currently own and have previously worked all the sites.

In all, 2 km of limestone quarry rock-face were studied, ranging in time since abandonment from currently active to over 80 years.

The study identified a suite of landforms analogous to those of natural dalesides (Gagen and Gunn, 1987) including limestone towers or buttresses, sinkholes or dolines, blast fracture cones and rock debris falls. The landforms include those which are natural but modified by quarrying as well as those entirely induced by quarrying. Examination of the drilling and blasting

Limestone quarry landforrns

f2- 9g ,,1 (J di

ml~g~ ~ ~16 Key

1Regolith loss 6 Rock collapse 2 Exhumed bedrock 7 Debris cone 3 Solution doline 8 Limestone 'tower' 4 Collapse doline 9 Toppling failure 5 Soil-rock debris 10 Debris chute

methods used on particular faces forms the basis for drawing rock face profiles which show both the landforms in, and potential stability of, different parts of the face as shown in one of the accompanying diagrams.

This descriptive and analytical work on the abandoned face provides a scientific datum which can become the starting point for further blasting but now with restoration as the objective. The aim is to produce a daleside landform composed of artificial rock faces, buttresses and screes, the scale and extent of which will mimic those of a natural daleside. Four specific elements contribute to producing the required effect.

• Reduction of face height by the construction of scree blast piles which will:

- mask the regular sequence of scorch marks of previous production blasts,

- cover the quarry face to varying heights thereby reducing the extent of face available to liberate rock falls,

- have varying angles of rest to differ from the relative uniformity of production blast piles,

11 Bedding plane 16 Depression 12 Vertical jointing 17 Blocky debris 13 Slumping 18 Slab debris 14 Opened joints 19 High fracture density 15 Toppled slabs 20 Tower collapse

- vary in their degree of fragmentation both vertically and laterally.

• Indentation of the crest line by a series of semi­circular cut-backs to mimic the collapse of natural sinkholes and blast fracture cones.

• Formation of a 'ragged' rock headwall in the upper third of the quarry face.

• Stabilisation of Hie scree blast piles by leaving a rock stump at the base of the face and/or by varying the fragmentation of the blasted rock downwards through the scree blast pile with the coarser material residing at the base.

Restoration blasting trials at ICI Tunstead Quarry have resulted in the formation of a landform sequence possessing many of the required characteristics. For the NCC, restoration blasting may offer a method of conserving and making safe selected areas of special geological interest in quarried faces, in a manner acceptable both to mineral operators, for whom it can be a cost-effective restoration method, and to mineral

12 13

A potential daleside landfonn sequence

11 Talus material

11 Scorched zone

Percussion zone

tEE Abandoned quarry face - profile resulting from production blasting

§ Blast fracture cone

[] Position of shot-hole

Quarry floor

D Stemming line

Quarry face - after restoration blasting .o>

-"Qoo.[[] o ~ ~ ~ Rock Rock Higher Lower Rock buttress headwall fragmentation fragmen tation scree

Partly stepped sea wall, Cornwall.

coastline of Britain, the exposures being kept fresh by continued marine erosion. Therein lies the conflict of interest between civil engineers and conservationists. Certainly, in some instances, if there is to be effect~

conservation of particular localities then some forms of coastal engineering and slope stabilisation must be regarded as incompatible with achieving that aim. However, in planning terms, it must be realised that earth science conservation is but one element in the equation and that consideration needs to be given to other aspects and interests before a decision can be taken on coastal protection works.

The NCC as a statutory consultee

Since 1980 the NCC has been regarded, firstly by the Department of the Environment (DoE) and then by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF), as a statutory consultee over all proposed coastal protection works, so the opportunity exists for the NCC to comment on all coastal engineering schemes which fall within the purview of the planning process. Of the many consultations received annually, only a few require comment and fewer still are the subject of an objection from the NCe The NCC attempts to represent a consensus view from the academic community when responding to these consultations and is not simply proffering its own opinion on particular schemes. Teachers and research geologists using these coastal sites obviously cannot be accorded the same rights of consultation over individual coastal engineering schemes, so it is up to the NCC firstly to canvass their views and secondly to evaluate those responses. Objections to coastal works are not made

lightly, but in the knowledge that the validity of those objections will possibly be tested at a Public Inquiry.

However, the whole issue of coastal protection is becoming increasingly politicised as local councillors and MPs are drawn into the debate over particular schemes as a result of lobbying by those whose house or livelihood seems threatened by cliff retreat In the event of an objection being raised to coastal protection on geological grounds, the NCC is frequently berated, both privately and in public, by those promoting a particular scheme. Accusations of over-zealous behaviour and bureaucratic insensitivity abound in the one-sided war of words as local residents and their representatives promulgate their case. The NCC can only state and restate the scientific case, but this is usually somewhat less newsworthy than the plight of the hapless individual who stands to lose everything as the edge of the cliffmar,ches ever closer to his front door.

Types of coastal protection works

There are many methods of protecting this coastline - a few of which are illustrated here. The purpose of most of these engineering structures is to stop marine erosion by placing a barrier, in the form of a sea wall or rock revetment, along the base of the eroding cliff line, thus inhibiting the action of the sea No longer subjected to marine erosion, the cliffs become stabilised and overgrown within a matter of a few years The resultant slope is of little value as a teaching or research site, as the underlying strata are no longer readily accessible to the field geologist Once

15

planning authorities who see the landscape and amenity value in such an approach

Research to date has been financially assisted by Manchester Polytechnic, ICI plc, the Peak Park Joint Planning Board, and the NCe

References -,

Dearden, ]. (1963) Derbyshire limestone its removal by man and by nature East Midlands Geographer. 3, 199-205.

Gagen, P,J., and Gunn,]. (1987). A geomorphological approach to restoration blasting in limestone quarries. In BF Beck and W L Wilson Eds. Karst Hydrology Engineenng and Environmental Applications. 457-462. AA Balkema, Netherlands.

Sherlock, RL. (1922). Man as a geological agent - an account ofhis action on inanimate nature. London.

The eroding coastline - coastal protection and conservation

As evidenced by many of the articles in this and previous issues of this journal, coastal protection works constitute a growing threat to our heritage of nationally and internationally important geological sites.

The geological heritage

Many classic geological localities occur along the coastline of Britain, such as the Jurassic sequences of Dorset, the glacial and interglacial sediments of the North Norfolk Coast and the stratotypes of the Hampshire Basin. Unfortunately, many of these coastlines are inherently unstable, suffering average rates of erosion of up to 2-3 m per annum Where such cliffs occur in close proximity to areas of habitation or recreation, there is strong local pressure to find an engineered solution to the problem of coastal erosion. Traditionally, such schemes involve the construction of concrete sea walls, cliff grading and cliff drainage, leading in some instances to the obliteration of any geological interest which may formerly have existed.

Many of the sites have value far beyond their purely academic interest as they are an indispensable economic resource in terms of their usefulness as a training ground for future generations of geologists Scientists, thus trained, go on to fulfil vital roles in society such as locating oil, gas and other mineral resources. Geology is a practical science and the many schools, polytechnics and universities which run courses in the subject have an obvious need to take their students into the field. For this, geological outcrop, be it natural or man-made, inland or coastal, is a basic prerequisite and it is essential that as many of the classic exposures and sections as possible remain accessible to student parties. Many of these important teaching and research sites are located along the

14

stabilised, there is a marked reluctance on the part of the landowner to allow future geological sampling to take place as this would necessarily involve disturbing the equilibrium of the slope.

Legislation governing coastal protection works

Protective works do, by and large, require planning permission, and the NCe's comments are invited in its capacity as a statutory consultee on all planning matters relating to SSSIs. There is a second opportunity to make a case when MAFF, the central government department who fund coastal protection works, seeks the NCe's views.

The legislative basis is provided by the Coast Protection Act 1949 which was enacted to ensure that works are efficiently designed and that the effects of new works on adjacent stretches of coastline are taken into account. It has certainly been our experience, albeit limited to the effect that such works have on SSSIs, that this aim is not always realised. The Act empowers the maritime district councils in England and Wales and the regional and island authorities in Scotland to carry out coastal protection work. There are 88 such authorities in England, 22 in Wales and 11 in Scotland, all with a duty to protect land from marine erosion. There are a number of celebrated examples where the actions of one authority appear to have led to increased problems of coast protection for a neighbouring authority.

These shortcomings have been recognised by MAFF, and in a Green Paper entitled Financing and Administration ofLand Drainage, Flood Protection and Coast Protec;..fion in England and Wales, a number of

structural changes have been recommended. This document suggests that the ten water authorities would be a more appropriate focus for coastal defence works, although district councils could retain a 'designated' responsibility for particular lengths of coastline within their area. However, the situation has become somewhat confused by the proposed privatisation of the water authorities and at this time there is no clear indication of how the situation will be resolved. It seems likely, whatever the outcome, that MAFF will remain in overall charge of policy towards and financing of coastal protection works.

In its discussions with MAFF and individual maritime district councils, the NCC has always promoted the idea of innovative design in coastal engineering works. At present, many of these schemes are designed to stop marine erosion in its tracks and rely heavily on the use of concrete and similar materials. This effectively ensures that any pre-existing geological interest is destroyed or sigmficantly damaged. This is difficult to reconcile with the spirit of Government policy on the matter which is given in DoE Circular 27/87 Nature Conservation. Paragraph 32 of this circular states "it is particularly important to take steps necessary to prevent valuable geological formations which are important for education and research from being obscured by dumping or tipping, or where they appear as coastal outcrops, if possible from damage by the effects of coastal protection schemes".

The maritime district council is faced with a dilemma. On the one hand, it is being instructed as the planning authority to provide effective protection to geological SSSIs within its area of jurisdiction, whilst on the other hand, MAFF requires each coastal protection scheme

Combination of seawall and groyne defences, Isle of Lewis. Note continued erosion in the llilprotected area in the foregrollild.

16

Gabion baskets, with rock infill, Rhu Point, Dumbarton.

Sea wall and blockstone ramp, Northumberland.

17

Concrete seawall under construction, West Runton, Norfolk Note recurvedlip designed to direct spent waves backwards.

to have a favourable cost-benefit ratio. Many local authorities find this an almost impossible balance to strike.

In these times of financial stringency, it is perhaps a forlorn hope that coastal protection schemes will be designed with innovation and experimentation in mind, but unless there is some change in thinking, then nationally and internationally important sections will continue to be lost. Areas which are perhaps worthy of further investigation include increased use of cliff drainage, offshore barriers and a refinement of beach feeding techniques. In addition to the financial penalty of an increased research requirement, some of these alternative forms of coastal protection do not attract such a high proportion of their total cost from central government in grant-aid, so a higher percentage of the on-going expenditure falls on the local ratepayer. Such shortcomings in the grant-aiding system ensures that coast protection authorities find it more difficult to give full and proper consideration to such alternative methods of coast protection. It is certainly our hope that in the future sufficient funds will be made available to allow coast protection authorities to investigate fully alternative methods of reducing marine erosion in every case.

These problems are further compounded by the fact that the cost benefit analysis presently takes no account of the value of a given cliff section as a teaching and research resource or its value to the local sediment budget. These are obviously very difficult variables to quantify, but surely the loss of a nationally or internationally important asset cannot go unrecorded in the calculation. Secondly :he cost-benefit assessment normally fails to acknowledge the important role which an eroding cliff line may have in the local sediment budget regime. If an eroding cliff line is stabilised to the

Wooden revetment under construction, West Runton, Norfolk

extent that it is no longer providing a significant input of beach forming material, then the effects of this loss are likely to be felt downdrift with the subsequent impoverishment of intertidal areas. It may be that, in some circumstances, beach feeding or engineering works have to be undertaken to make good that loss

Conclusions

There is an obvious requirement for coastal engineers and conservationists to be jointly involved in discussion at an earlier stage of the design process where proposed works fall within an SSSI, so that there is a greater opportunity for alternative methods of coastal protection to be considered With a greater emphasis on innovation and a more sympathetic approach to the environment, it may also be possible in the future to design methods of coastal defence which are effective in their primary aim, yet incorporate some measure of safeguard to any geological interest which may be present.

Changes in the way in which coastal protection works are administered are obviously desirable and such a restructuring seems a likely consequence of the review of the Coast Protection Act.

Finally, it is incumbent upon those involved with earth science conservation to explain their case to the lay public, engineers and the planners, so that a fuller understanding exists of the social and economic significance of the subject and also the value of associated field localities.

18

Invited feature

Editorial conunent

The future of geology as a subject in the school curriculum has been a matter of considerable concern and debate amongst geology teachers in recent years. The introduction of the GCSE has meant that geology syllabuses need to conform to the National Criteria for Science. Current discussions concerning the National Curriculum suggest that geology will be included in the science education of all children, albeit as component parts of thematic courses within the broad field of science.

The NCC recognised that conservation problems could well arise from these changes, particularly as it is likely that teachers without a formal geological training or background will be required to lead field excursions to demonstrate geological concepts and relationships within the context of science In an attempt to address this development, the NCC is preparing a fieldwork manual entitled Earth science fieldwork in the secondary school curriculum, as discussed in Earth science conservation, 23, p44 The manual is designed to assist teachers in organising and structuring their geological fieldwork, and increase their awareneJand appreciation of conservation policy and practice. The draft manuscript has been produced by John Fisher, working closely with NCC staff. Publication of the document is due in March 1988.

In the following article, John Fisher presents his personal views on the current position of geology teaching in schools. He examines the development and demise of the subject over the past thirty years, and looks at its future as an integral part of science courses in the National Curriculum. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NCe.

The role of geology in the school curriculum John A Fisher, Lecturer in Science Education, University of Bath

Geology, as a subject on the school timetable, as generally understood and reCOgnised, has been doomed for several years. In this article I will outline some of the factors which have contributed to its demise, look forward to possible new roles for the subject which are emerging during the current

educational debate and consider some of the implications for those ofus who will be involved in its future development.

1960-1985: a study of neglect

At the time of fundamental and rapid change during the late 1960s geology was not swept along as part of the educational revolution which so radically affected the teaching of most subjects in the school curriculum.

That part of the revolution which affected science education was initially financed by the Nuffield Foundation but, significantly, was a 'grass roots' movement which brought about major changes to the teaching of '0' level biology, chemistry and physics. These were subjects which had been well established in grammar schools since the GCE was introduced in 1950, but by the early 1960s, there was a conviction among the more aware science teachers that both the teaching style and content of these courses was becoming increasingly out of date and was failing to reflect the true nature of science. New schemes of work were devised with the expectation that the learning process would be very much more concerned with the pupils own experience and with knowledge acquired through practical activities. The movement was away from a theoretical, descriptive, didactic account of apparently unconnected scientific phenomena, to a methodology which focused much more on general, conceptual patterns and the appliq~.tion of deductive methods in order to account for observations in the laboratory or the field. The focus of the work was no longer to be on the teacher and the text book, but rather on the scientific experience itself.

Nuffield Science is now over 20 years old, but ideas which formed the backbone of the original courses can be traced through subsequent generations of curriculum development to the present day.

The intellectual demands made on pupils by Nuffield Science Courses were very high. As learning programmes they were a stimulating and satisfying challenge for the top 20% of the academic ability range who passed the 11-Plus examination and went to grammar schools. However, soon after their introduction, there began a process of evolution and adaption of the original schemes of work in response to other, more fundamental changes in the education system. These included comprehensivisation, the raising of the school leaving age and the introduction of the CSE examination.

19

k a consequence of about twenty years evolution and adaption of teaching methods and materials, there is now a fund of experience, resources and professional confidence which has grown in response to the changing nature of these science courses and their changing role in the curriculum. On the negative side, this has given rise to the 'problem' that there is a wide and firm perception of what a school science education is, what it should contain and a reluctance of many science teachers, parents and employers to accept radical change.

Regrettably, there has been no 'Nuffield Geology', or anything similar. As a subject, geology has always had a rather tenuous position in schools and has relied on individual, enthusiastic teachers to promote any interest or acceptance. When geology is offered as a 4th and 5th form option, pupils often do not have a clear perception of the subject because they have been denied the chance to experience this area as part of their science education in earlier years. As a result, option groups are often small, and the teacher constantly worried that their subject will no longer be seen as viable.

For these reasons, geology has never had any real prestige and this is a concomitant of its amateur status and image, together with the very ambivalent attitude of institutions of higher education to geology as an entry requirement to courses. It has become widely seen as an 'extra' subject which can be crammed into a sixth form study programme or as a subject for the less able, as it is generally regarded as less demanding than physics or chemistry. k a theoretical study with relatively low siatus and priority, geology is usually provided wilh the minimum of teaching resources, a problem made worse because geology has often been championed by physical geographers in schools and taught under the auspices of the geography department where there is not a demand for a wide range of laboratory facilities for experimental work.

Specialists in biology, chemistry and physics are at present actively involved in discussions about future curricula, but wherever geology is considered as a component part, rarely is it suggested that they might involve anyone from the geography department, even in a consultation role. As science teachers they are convinced that they could cover any geological input to courses and that geographers could not become members of the science teaching team without extensive in-service training and support, even if there were vacancies available.

The effects of the low status attributed to geology have been compounded as secondary school rolls have fallen and non-essential subject teachers have been redeployed; a crisis which has deepened as new subjects, such as computer studies and craft, design and technology have started to compete for fewer pupils.

20

The present situation

Because of years of serious neglect, the position of geology became critical; as a subject it had not responded to the demand that education should be more in accord with the needs of society, and was thus an anachronism and politically doomed.

What has been especially disturbing has been the apparent lack of concrete action by the geological establishment to support the subject, especially in working with professional bodies such as the ksociation for Science Education, to ensure that there was positive and rational debate about the future of geology. This is especially unfortunate as the decision was made in 1985 that geology GCSE examinations must meet the same assessment criteria as other science subjects and was therefore required to be taught in a manner consistent with that of biology, chemistry and physics.

In March of 1985 the Department of Education and Science published a document entitled Science 5-16.' a Statement ofPolicy, in which a number of very significant pronouncements were made. These included the requiTement that all pupils should receive an education in science up to the age of 16 years and that this education should be based on "broad" and "balanced" teaching schemes; the clear implication being that future courses must represent more truly the whole range of knowledge and experience which constitutes science. Also clear is that the particular subject content must receive a lower priority in our planning than the development of skills, attitudes and an understanding of the methods whereby scientific problems are identified and solved. It is made clear that learning through this more 'process based' methodology should be developed, progressively, over the total period of compulsory schooling and would, therefore, necessitate alternative teaching strategies, especially as these policies would be implemented within a fixed proportion of the total curriculum time (20% in years 4 and 5)

The danger is that many science teachers are still seeing the requiTement for "balanced science" as meaning a balance of 'the three sciences' which would have to be taught in a time traditionally seen as available for the teaching of two. They have a major problem, firstly in seeing that there may be as many as twenty three 'sciences' (if it were in any way helpful to continue with the use of specific subject discipline names); secondly that there are serious difficulties in reconciling the traditional perceptions of school science with the time which will be made available in which to teach 'balanced science', and thirdly, that a content-based model disregards the radical change in the list of priorities which underpins the new policy and which is likely to be incorporated into the National Curriculum.

The question of the content is fundamental. Course content will need to be severely limited in quantity, not only because of time considerations, but because further limitations will be inevitable since 'process based science' is inherently more demanding of time. Work programmes will be centred on enquiry, investigation and problem solving, throughout which the pupil wil~ have much greater control of his or her own learning by employing the methods of science as a means of gaining the appropriate knowledge and skills. In this context content is the means to the end and not the end itself; most important is what people can do, not what they say they think they can dOl

The way forward

In view of past mistakes and missed opportunities we must ensure an acceptance that balanced science, by definition, contains elements drawn from the whole range of science regardless of prejudice and historical precedent; that all of science is recognised as available to service the new courses and is seen as a potential vehicle for the learning process. Secondly, once all of science is in the 'melting pot', we must ensure that the appropriate criteria are used when selecting those elements to be used to service the alternative types of course structure which will emerge to meet the requirements of individual schools, or groups of schools.

The word 'relevance' is also used constantly in the..r debate about future science courses. This, of course, begs a lot of questions, but let us consider how we might articulate the case for geology being part of an education in, and through, science.

• The economic implications of the work of the geologist; for example the origin, occurrence and exploitation of building materials, fossil fuels and minerals and the concomitant human and environmental considerations. A very high proportion of the gross national product of the UK is dependent on the geo-industries.

• Aspects of technology; geology as applied to civil engineering, waste disposal, geothermal energy and mineral processing. Many of these aspects have topical economic and political significance about which young people should be able to make sound judgements based on their understanding of the lSsues.

• The place of geology in the cultural development of man; how an understanding of the natural environment has changed relative to that of other aspects of human endeavour. The two greatest cultural revolutions are both an integral part of the earth sciences; the Copernican and the Darwinian

• Geology and leisure; how an interest and involvement in geology contributes significantly to the enjoyment of leisure time spent in the natural

21

environment. There are clear opportunities to be grasped as outdoor education, which is another growth area of the school curriculum, develops.

Relevance is just one criterion, and one where aspects of geology can stake a strong claim for a place in new teaching schemes. However, it must again be borne in mind that these courses will have a different rationale for their organisation than traditional, content based courses. They may involve a thematic structure, where elements previously associated with various disciplines will contribute to the theme through a series of guided investigations. In this case, as with other sciences, geology will need to be unravelled and its separate elements identified. Selected elements will then be re-woven into a course where geology will contribute, but one in which the geological elements may well have the key role. Because of the multidisciplinary nature of geology and the number of interfaces it shares with other sciences, it will have great potential as an integrating medium.

It will also bring a means of extending and enriching certain topics which are already well established in schools. For example, chemistry specialists have usually given pupils the problem of purifying rock salt during, their first year at secondary school. Here there is a g<)0d opportunity to start the investigation by considering arid environments, sedimentary processes and the formation of evaporite minerals generally. At leasf then pupils will not have the idea that rock salt is found only in bottles and significantly, there is the possibility of exploring the chemistry of other important evaporites, such as gypsum, and their uses in industry. In this example an earth science focus is very effective in drawing together aspects of chemistry which are already taught, but into an alternative framework which is broader, stimulating and more able to demonstrate relevance to everyday life.

It follows that geology specialists must be willing to break down the restraining, stereotyped, 'chapter headings' of their subject in order that the wider science-teaching fraternity will recognise that it can provide valuable and relevant starting points for formative investigations. For example, titles such as 'Fossils' and 'Minerals' would have to disappear and the essential ideas re-emerge in a form that can become part of more general and fundamental topics on 'Evolution' and 'Chemicals from Rocks' respectively.

Geology and process-based science

Some clarification on what we mean by process-based science may be appropriate. The first stage is always the appreciation of a problem which relates to some natural phenomenon, but for school pupils this must be based on concrete experience and arise through them making first hand observations. The subject of these observations may arise naturally, but more usually they are introduced by the teacher and chosen because, in

the normal course of the process, the activities will take the pupils into new areas where active learning can occur. It is from these observations and subsequent discussion that the pupils start to ask questions and, under the guidance of their teacher, identify and articulate specific problems.

Most of the practical work carried out in school science involves prescribed demonstrations. These may be teacher-based, but often they are pupil-based with the student being asked to follow a set of instructions and to record the result. This is all to the good, providing that the recording reflects good scientific practice and does not itself become the aim of the lesson. Tragically, the results of these observations are often called 'conclusions' and the observations themselves called 'experiments', and it is this short-circuiting of the process must be remedied by earth science specialists if they are to stand alongside the more professionally competent biology, chemistry and physics specialists.

My own realisation of this problem came to me some years ago during a field excursion which was part of an Association of Teachers of Geology conference programme. The field leader pointed out some pillow lavas and their general shape, and then said "we therefore conclude that they are becoming younger in this direction", pointing out to sea. A voice inside me shouted, "that's not a conclusion, that's a hypothesis". He had fallen into the trap of going from observation to conclusion without any regard for the investigative and evaluative stages of the scientific process. This is a particularly serious problem in ensuring that geology is compatible with other sciences in its teaching methodology. For years, geology teachers have plugged basic observations, such as rock descriptions, or fossil records, into some 'key' which miraculously converts them into factual conclusions; the most important part of the science process is then by-pass ed. As the 'key' is often based upon sweeping generalisations, it may be particularly misleading to pupils apart from the unhelpful contribution which it makes to sustaining the delusion that what is being done is science

The second stage lS, of course, for the pupils to suggest solutions to their problem and to devise methods by which hypotheses can be tested. The questions should emerge naturally and will include those which might be tackled by the pupils themselves. This will lead to the design of alternative methods by which the problems might be tackled; it is important that we do not give the idea that there is an absolutely right way of going about things. They will need time to follow up their ideas even though the teacher may know that a particular method may not give the 'usual' result. The skills of writing a clear and accurate account of their work, and the use of safe and appropriate methods will need to be aCquired over a longer period of time; these certainly could not be achieved within a one year course, but because

22

there is a demand, it seems likely that examination boards will accept one-year's work by pupils for assesment, even though such a policy contradicts the spirit of the National Criteria for Science For this reason, the sooner 'geology' disappears from the 11-16 curriculum the better l

The final stage in the process is examination and evaluation of their results when pupils will need to ask themselves whether they have got an answer to their original question. If they have not, then they may need to reconsider the method which they adopted. If they have achieved a positive result, and here the collaborative aspects of science can be engendered by some consensus being drawn through discussion groups, then they will need help in fitting the new knowledge into their slowly growing framework of scientific understanding. At this stage, either a totally fresh observational input can be introduced or additional problems may be tackled based on the original input.

Only if an activity is carried out in response to a rationally established question, which is understood and identified by all the class, is that activity an 'experiment'. However, many earth science teachers have difficulty providing the right sort of starting point to the process so that, through the experience the pupils are going to learn some essential skills, methods and concepts which are recognisably scientific Here we really have to be very firm in our resolve to radically change the nature of geological education.

Biology specialists use, as exemplars, organisms which are accessible. They may think that studying the feeding habits of the Nile crocodile may make a more colourful lesson, but to develop investigational skills they are rather more pragmatic and choose woodlice or earthworms because they are available and within the pupils everyday experience. In terms of the process it makes no difference whether it lS a worm or a crocodile, the same skills and methods would be required, so they choose the humble worm.

Similarly, the Grand Canyon may be very interesting and dramatic and so it may feature in text books as a theoretical example of a certain type of erosional feature; the problem is, of course that it is hot within travelling distance usmg the school minibus! The implication is that the Grand Canyon does not provide an appropriate starting point for an earth science investigation; it is outside the pupils direct experience, and they are not able to test their ideas through observation and thus particular questions may not be answered by means of 'the process'. Even a case-study approach limits the process in that it restricts the potential scope of the observation; the writer of the case-study acts as a 'gatekeeper' for the information available and therefore the study is predetermined by definition.

Practical teaching methods

Traditional school geology text books are a millstone around our necks which we could well do wi,thout. While they are still on the shelf, the mould will not be broken and there will still be the temptation to teach about geology rather than geology itself. Regrettably, such books are still being used as models in some current curriculum development!

Firstly, we must be absolutely certam about which educational objectives we are trymg to meet at any particular stage in a pupil's science education; these must be continuous and progressive and in accord with the pupils general growth in intellectual and cognitive ability; the development of the skill to carry out science will grow over the five years of compulsory secondary schooling. Our work with young people must be based on what is meaningful, relevant and accessible (which is still, thankfully, a requirement insisted upon by the GCSE examination groups), the field sites must be chosen carefully to ensure that they are suitable. We must also ensure that the field site to which we introduce pupils is appropriate for that specific stage in the pupil's development.

lf pupils visit a site and find that they are not able to carry out accurate and appropriate obsevational work, ask themselves questions and define problems for themselves and have the background skills, knowledge and confidence to organise the investigative work, .wen they are not ready for that site. If they are not yet afiie to handle the geological problems at that site, we should choose one where the problems are more realistic and within range of the pupils' abilities.

What must also be guarded against is the temptation to persist with the Cook's Tour approach to field work. When time away from school is very limited, it is easy to understand why so much observation is squeezed into a day's itinerary, but what we must realise is that field work is not the climax, or drawing together, of . theoretical school-based work; that a field study itself is not the end product. In a process-based philosophy for science education, fieldwork too must be the means to the end, not the end itself. We must get away from the field lecture and any temptation to describe features and geological events exemplified at a site just because they are there, regardless of the readiness of the pupils for such a didactic onslaught.

The range of field sites at which to carry out investigative work is becoming increasingly scarce. It is not the large, well known or 'classic' sites which are of primary interest to me as an educationalist; they are in good hands. It is the number of small and unglamorous sites, which are within easy reach of every school which is my concern. Earth science can never be taught effectively in schools unless they are there in abundance and easily accessible. Conservation and protection must not only be based on the academic and

23

research value of a site; ask the science teacher of class 2C what his or her requirements are l

At a later stage, pupils will be better prepared for more complex problem solving which may well involve sorting out the relationship between a number of exposures within a region. Certainly in the early years, pupils will not be able to carry out such abstract tasks and our priority should rather be in generating an interest and enthusiasm for science which will endure. We then need to provide the skills, methods and attitudes which will bring confidence and a self­sufficiency which will be important in later life. In so doing, we can provide the means by which knowledge and understanding can grow, so that as citizens they will be able to appreciate many of the economic and political issues which impinge on their lives and the role of the scientist in society.

Geological Conservation Review

Progress on GCR site selection

In the last issue of this journal we reported on the GCR site selection position as at 15 April 1987. Since that time the total number of sites selected has risen to 2740, with a further 407 sites envisaged, giving a projected final total of 3147 sites. The bulk of the remaining sites will

GCR site selection position: 18 January 1988

Stratigraphic blocks

GCR block

Neogene Palaeogene Cenomanian-Maastrichtian Aptian-Albian Berriasian-Barremian Wealden Portlandian Kirnmeridgian Oxfordian Callovian Bathonian Aalenian-Bajocian Toarcian Hettangian~'pliensbachian Rhaetian Perrno-Trias Permian 'Marine' Westphalian Namurian England and Wales Dinantian N England and Wales Dinantian Devon and Cornwall Dinantian S England and S Wales Dinantian Scotland Devonian Marine Devonian Non-marine Ludlow Wenlock Llandovery Caradoc-Ashgill Llandeilo Arenig-Llanvirn Tremadoc-Cambrian Torridonian Precambrian England and Wales Dalradian Moine Lewisian

Total 37 blocks

24

be selected by the end of March 1988, although some blocks (principally Pleistocene/Quaternary blocks where site clearance is needed before final assessment can take place) will not be completed unW mid- to late­1988. A process of further periodic review of new work will continue after initial selection is completed, but this will be on a limited scale at least until the GCR publication programme is approaching its conclusion. The detailed current position is set out in the accompanying table.

Palaeontology blocks

GCR block

Palaeobotany Tertiary Palaeobotany Mesozoic Palaeobotany Palaeozoic Silurian-D~vonian Chordata Perrno-Carboniferous Fish!Amphibia Mesozoic-Tertiary Fish!Amphibia Birds Mesozoic Mammalia Tertiary Mammalia Pleistocene Vertebrata Perrno-Trias Reptilia Jurassic-Cretaceous Reptilia Tertiary Reptilia Palaeoentomology Arthropoda Precambrian Palaeontology

Total 16 blocks

Sites selected Sites outstanding

27 25 44 54 8 4 9

13 25 8

11 8

42 17 28 5

18 I 6 5 5

315 48 Sites selected

15 25 34 33 12 48 28 13 32 8

43 49 16 28 13 44 18 68 49 66 9

23 33 55 39 23 45 34 36

35 39 II 26 89 66 27

1232

Sites outstanding

10

2

4

8 6

5 7

5

10

5 5

20

2

33 II

133

Structural blocks

GCRblock

Alpine of S England Variscan of SW England Variscan of S Wales and Mendips Caledonian of Wales Caledonian of the Lake District Caledonian of the S Uplands

Total 6 blocks

Igneous and mineralogy blocks

GCRblock

Tertiary Igneous SW England Igneous Permo-Carboniferous Igneous Old Red Sandstone Igneous Caledonian Igneous Ordovician Igneous Mineralogy of Scotland Mineralogy of SW England Mineralogy of England* Mineralogy of the Lake DIStrict Mineralogy of Wales Mineralogy of the Pennines * excluding Lake District, the Pennines and SW England

Total 12 blocks

25

Sites selected Sites outstanding

4 10 14 27 14 8 7

11 7

58 44

Sites selected Sites outstanding

52 49 8 38 5 20 55 52 9 47 26 9 29 8 12 7 19 16 4

415 50

Quaternary and geomorphology blocks

GCRblock

Quaternary of Scotland Quaternary of Wales Quaternary of NE England Quaternary of E England Quaternary of Cumbria Quaternary of the Pennines Quaternary of the Midlands and Avon Quaternary of the Thames Quaternary of Somerset Quaternary of SE England Quaternary of South Central England Quaternary of SW England Pleistocene of East Anglia Holocene Sea Levels Pollen Rivers Tufa Coastal Geomorphology of Scotland Coastal Geomorphology of England Coastal Geomorphology of Wales Mass Movement Caves Karst

Total 23 blocks

Publication plans for the GCR

In the last issue of this journal we outlined the overall publication plan for the GCR series, and we take here the opportunity to bring readers up to date on progress. Following his promotion to the NCe's Director of the Policy, Planning and Services Directorate, Dr Derek Langslow has withdrawn from the GCR Publication Management Committee (GCRPMC), and his place as Chairman of the Committee has been taken by Prof John Knill. Five volumes are currently in progress as follows:

Vol29:TertiaryIgneous

Editor: Dr C H Emeleus Writer Mr M Gyopari Text completion date April 1988

Vol33: Metallogenesis

Writer and editor: Dr LJ Haynes Text completion date: December 1988

26

Sites selected Sites outstanding

119 68 8 2

20 3 10 21 18 5 43 22 19 19 2 37 1 53 10

40 20

55 40 11 5 32 4 38 1 12 27 48 40

720 133

Vol37: Quaternary of Scotland

Editor Dr D G Sutherland Writers: Dr J E Gordon with contributions from others Text completion date: February 1988

Vol 38: Quaternary of Wales

Editor: Prof D Q Bowen Writer Dr S Campbell Text completion date: Summer 1988

Vol44: Quaternary of the Thames

Writer and editor Dr D Bridgland Text completion date: Spring 1988

Candidate writers and editors have been identified by the GCRPMC for a further 25 volumes, and discussions have been started with the aim of agreeing terms and commencing work. Guidance notes concerning style, format, manuscript preparation and contractual procedures have been prepared to assist writers and editors in their work, and to ensure an overall consistency between volumes in the series.

The second GCR Contributors Meeting: a report

The second GCR Contributors Meeting was held in London on the 25 January 1988, when over thirty GCR contributors: together with the NCe's earth science staff, gathered in the Geological Society's Apartments at Burlington House.

The NCC first initiated this series of meetings in 1986 in order to provide a forum for airing GCR-related issues and discussing future strategies The many GCR contributors are widely dispersed throughout Britain and the meetings offer a rare opportunity to gather as a group, and to get to know each other and the NCC staff. The NCC is also keen to use these occasions to brief contributors on current and future plans for the GCR, and to seek comment and promote debate on both GCR and other issues arising from its work in the area of earth science conservation.

The morning session of the second meeting was chaired by Dr Keith Duff, one ofthe NCC's Assistant Chief Scientists, and took the form of a number of short presentations by the NCC staff followed by discussion sessions. Dr Bill Wimbledon, Editor-in-Chief of the GCR, reported on progress with site selection and on publication plans for the GCR series of volumes (fCj.. details see elsewhere in this issue) Particular interest was generated by a series of artwork 'mock-ups' of the outer cover for the series, and by sample finished examples of site-maps intended for inclusion in the Tertiary Igneous volume. This type of advance consultation was clearly well received by contributors and, in response to the interest shown, the NCC has agreed to use future issues of the GCR Newsletter to keep contributors up to date on developments and to provide further guidance documents for writers and editors; for L'1stance on an agreed GCR format for maps and figures. Dr Duff concluded the morning's proceedings by presenting a paper outlining the range of contractual options available to prospective writers of GCR volumes.

Professor John Knill, chairman of the GCR Publication Management Committee, chaired the afternoon's proceedings which started with a report by Dr Laurie Richards on progress with (re)notification of GCR sites. Despite the steady progress evident in the statistics for this area ofactivity, some contributors expressed disquiet with the rate of final notification of new GCR sites. Dr Duff agreed that this was a problem area and that the NCC would need to redouble its efforts to ensure more rapid progress. Much comment was also generated by the circulation at the meeting of a list of proposed denotifications of SSSIs which were now judged not to meet the necessary GCR standards Prof Knill pointed out that this highlighted the need for the

27

geological community as a whole to act quickly and effectively to find alternative means of safeguarding such sites. Several speakers observed that geologists were, as a breed, much slower than biologists in joining County Trusts and actively working for conservation, and that until they did so the prospect of ensuring protection for such 'second tier' sites would remain in the balance. For its part the NCC agreed to make sure that the denotification list was widely publicised in the near future (see elsewhere in this issue) in order that the geolOgical community was alerted to the need for action.

Dr Keith Duff rounded off the afternoon session with a presentation on the increasingly important role that corrnnissioned research is assuming in enabling the NCC to meet its obligations in the area of site safeguard. Commissioned research provides a means of acquiring detailed scientific and technical information relating to sites, and the results of this type of applied research enables NCC staff to make highly informed, professional decisions, both on individual casework issues and in the formulation of broader policy. Dr Duff invited contributors to consider what role such research might play ill safeguarding GCR sites within their particular specialist interest fields, and to make suggestions for future research proposals to the NCe. He also reminded those present that funds for corrnnissioned research were 'new money', and did not derive from diversion of funds from the Geological Conservation Review.

Prof Knil!, in his closing address, echoed the feeling evident amongst contributors that the meeting had been most successful in drawing them more closely into the mechanics and details of producing the GCR series, and in giving them, for the first time, a 'feel' for what the final published product would look like.

In response to the demand for a further Contributors Meeting, the NCC plans to convene the next meeting in late 1988, by which time publication plans for the initial volumes of the GCR series should be well advanced.

SSSI notification and denotification

Progress on SSSI notification

The latest statistics recording progress on notifying OCR sites as SSSIs are presented in the accompanying table, The term Single Interest Locality (SIL) means a particular locality selected to illustrate geological or geomorphological feahrres for a particular OCR interest block (for example, Tertiary Igneous), However, several SILs may be adjacent or indeed overlapping (for example a Tertiary Igneous SIL may also show excellent raised beach feahrres, and for this reason be in addition a Quaternary of Scotland SIL), Where this happens the area of land notified as a single SSSI may comprise several SILs.

To date 2740 SILs have been selected by the GCR, and 2460 have been fully processed: the distribution of the latter figure between countries being 1425 in England, 679 in Scotland and 356 in Wales Notification packages, detailing the Potentially Damaging Operations (PDOs), for 2162 of these have been issued to the NCC's regional staff whose responsibility it is to pursue the notification procedure through to its final stage. 1090 SSSIs have been notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, including many sites originally designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside,Act 1949.

SSSIdenotification

Readers will be aware that the main purpose of the Geological Conservation Review is to re-assess the relative significance of Britain's geological and geomorphological sites and to ensure that the coverage of SSSIs adequately represents the most important localities in these subject areas. The most well-known result is that a substantial number of new localities worthy of SSSI status has been identified, and that these are in the process of being notified as SSSIs to ensure their fuhrre protection, Perhaps less well-known is the fact that a number of localities, which were notified as SSSIs before the GCR started work in 1977, have been re-assessed as part of the OCR exercise and found not to measure up to the more rigorous selection criteria now being used, and are now being removed from the list of notified SSSIs,

The process of denotification removes such localities from the legal protection afforded by SSSI status, and the NCC, being fully aware of the significance of such a move, is concerned that in each instance the decision to denotify has been carefully weighed in advance by the GCR, and that the underlying logic is understood by the geological cormnunity.

OCR site (re)notification position: 18 January 1988

Number of SILs processed

Number of notification

packages sent to NCC regional staff

(equivalent number of SILs)

Number of geological SSIs

which have been (re)notified under

1981 Act

563

224

115

902

(equivalent number of SILs)

(718)

(275)

(141)

(1134)

England 1425 1010 (1319)

Scotland 679 413 (557)

Wales 356 238 (286)

Totals: 2460 1661 (2162)

Since the inception of the NCC's involvement in geolOgical conservation in 1950, geological SSSIs have always been selected on a national basis, unlike their biological counterparts which are usually selected locally. In this way the national or international significance of earth science SSSIs has been an important selection criterion from the start, and this fact has been most instrumental in the NCC's successful record in defending the sites against development proposals, Over the years, however, the perception of 'national' significance has changed in line with the expansion of geological research in Britain and the rapid development of the science in the last twenty five years. There has also been the realisation that some of the sites added to the SSSI coverage through ad hoc revisions prior to the GCR did not measure up to the stricter criteria now being used,

In order to ensure that the credibility of both the OCR and the earth science SSSls as a series of nationally important sites was not undermined, the NCC therefore decided, in 1977, that pre-OCR sites not reaching GCR standard would be denotified.

We are well aware, however, that whilst these sites no longer satisfy OCR standards, they still retain in many instances significant earth science interest on a regional or local basis, and that there is considerable merit in trying to safeguard and conserve such sites through the use of mechanisms other than SSSI protection, For example, county nahrralists trusts can

fbe encouraged to become involved in the conserv'8.tion of such sites, perhaps with the co-operation of local, regional or national geological societies, Other options could include the establishment of formal or informal adoption schemes, and encouraging local authorities to add the localities to their inventories of locally important conservation sites, The NCC, in fulfilling its commitment to conservation in the wider environment (that is, away from SSSIs and NNRs), can assist in promoting such alternative approaches to conserving particular sites, Denotification does not mean th9-t a site is unimportant, simply that the SSSI mechanism is inappropriate in planning its safeguard,

To help earth scientists and conservation bodies to identify the sites concerned, a full list of all the pre-GCR SSSIs which are now recormnended for denotification is set out in the accompanying tables. For some of these, the process is well advanced or has been concluded, but for many others no firm action has yet been initiated. Further details of the precise location of a particular site, and the nahrre of the geological interest are available from the NCC upon request. We hope that anyone with an interest in any of the sites will therefore be able to investigate the possibility of making alternative local conservation arrangements if they feel it is desirable, As indicated above, the NCC will be pleased to offer advice and background assistance as appropriate, We would also be interested to receive

28

any other cormnents related to the list; these should, in the first instance, be addressed to the Editor of the journaL

List of geological and geornorphological SSSIs recommended for denotification by the OCR

An asterisk (*) after a site name indicates that the SIte has been formally denotified.

England

Avon

Conygar Quarry* Saltford Railway Cutting*

Bedfordshire

Mundays Hill Pit* Oakley Railway Junction Pit* Pinnacle Phosphatic Nodule Bed*

Buckinghamshire

Ivinghoe Hills & Clipper Down Moorend Cormnon & Gubbins Hole Purser's Pit Soulbury Erratic The Lee

Cambridgeshire

Burwell Chalk: Pit* Underwood Hall Pit* We9ton Colville Chalk Pit* Wood Ditton Chalk Pit*

Cornwall

Cheesewring Quarry

Cumbria

Bowder Stone, Borrowdale* Pate Hole &Low Pate Hole* Rosthwaithe Road* Tilberthwaite Gill*

Derbyshire

Ashover Quarries & Stream Section (Hockley Quarry, forming part of this 1949 Act SSSI, has yet to be assessed by the OCR)

Pleasley Vale* . Stoneycroft Quarry (Part of 1949 Act SSSI Baileycroft &

Stoneycroft)

Devon

Bishop's Court Quarry* Brixton Quarry* Heavitree Quarry* Hill Head Quarry* Hole Lake Farm Quarry* Holne Chase* Kenton Hill Road Cutting* Luxton* Pocombe Quarry*

29

Rocknell & Westleigh Quarries* Solland Quarry* Tolcis Quarry* Wembury Point* Whiteway Farmyard*

Dorset

Bincombe* Evershot Pit* Owermoigne Heath Pit* Parsons Pit*

Durham

Chestergarth Quarry* East Thickley Quarry* Hope Level Cavern* Moking Hurth Cave*

Essex

Bartlow Gravel Pit Brentwood Brick Works Foulness Great Chesterfield Chalk Pit Hallsford Pit Orsett Road Section, Grays Thurrock Ugley Quarry Wedlock Green Gravel Pit

Gloucestershire

Chedworth Railway Cuttings Cooper's Hill LNR (including Fiddler's Elbow Quarry) Cotswold Commons and Beechwoods (including

Catsbrain Quarry) Damery Quarry Frampton Mansell Railway Cutting Hailey Farm-Railway Cutting Jarvis' New Quarry New Grounds, The Noose and Hock Cliff Pen Wood Randwick Quarry Rudge Hill (including Scottsquarr Quarry) Stratton Road Quarry Stonehouse Brickpits Tuff1ey's Quarry

Greater London

Kenley Station Chalk Pit* North End Pit* Riddlesdown (Rose & Crown Quarry)*

Greater Manchester

Goyt River Section*

Hampshire

Candovers Farm Pit* Farlington Redoubt Pit* Headley Farm Pit* Kingsclere Stream Section* Micheldever Station Cutting* Paulsgrove Pit*

Hereford and Worcestershire

Black Mountains (Eastern) Brockhill Quarry Collin's Green Quarry Dodford Boulder (Erratic) Elmley Lovett Track Cutting (The Holloway) Hergest Ridge (includiIlg The Whet Stone) Lower Wolton Road Cutting Mere Hill Wood Track Sections Romsley Hill Boulders (Erratics) Southstone Rock and Dingle Todding Lane Sections Witnells End Quarry

Hertfordshire

Ayot Pit Barkway Chalk Pit Chadwell Hill & Line's Quarry Chalk Pit Gaddesden Row Brick Pit Hitch Wood (includes detached Hillend Farm Pit) Hitchin Railway Cutting Moor Park Sand Pit Potterscrouch Section Reed Chalk Pit Roughdown and Sheethanger Commons (includes

Boxmoor Chalk Pit) Royston Erratic St Michael's Bridge Wallington Chalk Pit

Humberside

Bessingby Chalk Pit* Elsham Pit* Elsham Sandstone Exposures* Hessle Cement Works Pit* Kiplingcotes Station Pit* Middleton on the Woid Chalk Pit* The Lindholme Stone* Wold Newton Meteorite Monument*

Isles of Scilly

Garrison Gateway Cottage, St Marys*

Isle of Wight (Hampshire)

Arreton Down Shide Quarry

Kent

Knockmill Pit Lime Kiln Wood Chalk Pit Sayer's Woodyard, Ramsgate

Lancashire

Arbour Quarry* Foxley Bank Quarry* Higher Clough* Little Bowland Knolls* Lost John Cave* (now in Leck Beck Head Catchment) Skellow Clough*

30

Leicestershire

Groby Slate Works & Alder Spinney Ives Head Miller's Quarry, Halstead Old Dalby Cutting

Lincolnshire

Claxby Chalk Pit East Keal Clay Pit Ings Farm Escarpment Stenigot Road Cutting

Merseyside

Great Crosby Boulder

Norfolk

Billockby Sand Pit Blackdyke Farm Chalk Pit Crown Point Pit Eaton Chalk Pit Frettenham Chalk Pit Hillington Chalk Pit Newton-By-Castle-Acre Chalk Pit WarhamCamp

Northamptonshire

Cranford Quarry* Tiffield Quarry* Weldon Stone Quarry* Westfield Lodge Quarry* White Lodge Quarry*

Northumberland

Beadnell Shore* Black Pasture Quarry* Doddington Quarry* Haltwhistle Burn* Irthing Gorge* Kirkheaton Quarry* Old Dryburn Quarries* Snableazes Quarry* Wards Hill Quarry* Waterfall Quarry*

North Yorkshire

Draughton Quarry* Flixton Chalk Pit* Foxholes Chalk Pit* Horton in Ribblesdale Cutting* Kirkham Abbey Gorge * Semerwater (Carlow Stone)*

Nottinghamshire

Barnstone Railway Cutting* Red Quarry, Mansfield*

Oxfordshire

Breakspear's Quarry Childrey Lune Quarry Chipping Norton Quarry

Fawler Quarry Friars Hill North Lodge Pit Taynton Quarries Warren Farm Pit

Peak District

Ashford Black Marble Quarry* Bakestondale* Bretton Clough* Calverpeak Quarry* Chrome and Parkhouse Hills* Grangemill Quarry* Hartington Station Quarry* Lee Farm Quarry* Monsal Head* Sparrow Pit* Stoney Middleton Crag* Tideswell Dale Quarry*

Shropshire

Chatwell Farm Cutting & Quarry* Doseley Quarry* Hazier Quarry Hudwick Dingle* Lea Rock* Llanymynech Hill & Llynllys Hill* Maddock's Hill Quarry* Squilver Quarry* Tasker Quarry*

.;/" Tickwood and Benthall Edge* Wart Hill* West Caer Caradoc* Wiresytch Quarry*

Somerset

Cockcroft Quarry* Warren Hill Road Cutting*

South Yorkshire

Stairfoot Brickworks*

Staffordshire

HighOnn

Suffolk

Black Ditches, Cavenham Coe's Pit, Bramford & Bramford Brickfield Foxhall Hall Pit Hill Farm Pit, Aldham Little Cornard Brick Pit Newbourn Pit & Wood Sudbury Chalk Pit Virtue's Farm Pit, Hollesley West Row Chalk Pit West Stow Brick Pit

31

Surrey

Badshot Farm Chalk Pit Chelsham & Woldingham Group (includes Nore Hill

Pinnacle LNR)* Clandon Traverse Greyfriars Chalk Pit Jolly Farmer Pit, Runfold Leith Hill Ranmore Common Thursley, Hankley & Frensham Commons (includes the

Devil's Jumps) Upper Hale Gravel Pits

Tyne and Wear

Boldon Golf Course Quarry* Downhill Quarry*

Warwickshire

King's Hill Boulder (Erratic) Knowle End Tramway Cutting Parkfield Road Quarry (Victoria Pit, Rugby) Steppy Lane Section (Purley Park) Stockton Quarry Tattle Bank Quarry Windmill Hill Quarry Oudkins Quarry)*

West Midlands

Dudley Castle Hill Canal basin Rubery Cutting & Leachgreen Quarries

Wiltshire

Calstone & Cherhill* Cley Hill* Devizes Gault Pit* Docks Clay Pit* Hursley Bottorns* Leigh Delamere* Ogbourne Maizey Chalk Pit* Purlon Brick Pit* Quidhampton Chalk Pit* West Kington Lane Section*

Scotland

Aberdeen

Balgownie Bridge

Angus

Leysrnill Quarry*

Argyll and BU1e

Eas Mor Duart, Mull* Glen Forsa, Mull* Gruinart Flats* South Bute Coast* Staffa*

Banff and Buchan

Aberdour Coast* Buchan Ness*

Sandford Hill* Tore of Troup*

Berwickshire

St Helens Church Dry Channel*

Clydesdale

The Bank*

Curnnock and Doon

Ballochmyle Quarries

Cunningharne

Gleann Dubh* Gurdie Cutting* Hessilhead Quarry* Portencross Coast*

Dundee

Duntrune* Tealing Quarry*

East Lothian

Aikengall* Bass Rock* Markle Quarries* North Berwick Law*

Edinburgh

Comiston Sand Pit* Craigleith Quarry* Craiglockhart Hill West* Dalmeny Quarry* Morton Hill Quarry* Torphin Quarry*

Inverclyde

Bogie Stone* Craigmuschat Quarry*

Kincardine and Deeside

Slack of Birnie*

Kircaldy

Orrock Hill*

Kyle and Canick

Ballantrae Shingle Beach* Newlands Quarry*

Lochaber

Acharacle* Callert East, Loch Leven* Camas Calltuinn* Glenmore Plug* Invergloy* Loch Nevis* Marnore Coast* Ormsaigbeg Shore*

32

Monklands

Brewsterford*

Moray

Ardwell Inn River Section* Earth Pillars, Fochabers* Rosebrae Quarry*

Nairn

Kingsteps Quarry* Leithen (North Bank of Muckle Burn)*

Nithsdale

Crichope Linn* Enterkin Burn*

North East Fife

Drurndryan Quarry* Dura Den*

Orkney

Bookan Quarry* Dingieshow St Peter's Pool* Mirkady Point* Sacquoy Head, Rousay* Swuarsquoy (Weethick)*

Ross and Cromarty

Cromarty Gullies

Strathkelvin

Lennoxtown Essexite*

Skye and Lochalsh

Sron A Bheallain* Strollarnus*

Stirling

Kinbuck Esker*

Sutherland

Cnoc na Beiste* Dornoch Esker* Eilean Nan Ron* LochAssyntQuarry*

Tweedale

Glen Dean Banks* Stobo Slate Quarry*

West Lothian

Hill House Quarry* Linlithgow Loch*

Western Isles

. kibost - Baleshare and Eackarnish* Machair and Dunes, North Uist

Wigtown

Lady Bay*

Wales

Clwyd

Ffemant Dingle Graig Fawr Graig Fechan Quarry Graig Quarry Prestatyn Hillside Ty'n Llanfair

Dyfed

Cil-Yr-Ychen Quarry Cwm Llyfnant (Llyfnant Valley) (also in Powys) Prendergast Place Pit

Gwent

Porth Llong

Gwynedd

Mon Dwyfach Section Callaway's Knob Coedydd Aber NNR Llyn Cororion Morfa Bychan NantPeris Pennant Dyfi Porth Yr Ysgaw TwtHill

Mid. Glamorgan

Longlands Quarry Merthyr Mawr Warren Sutton Road Section

Powys

Breidden Hills Powis Arms Quarry Tynllidiart Pingos

West Glamorgan

Killay Brickpit Pont-Rhyd-y-Fen Kame Terrace

33

Public Inquiries

Morrich More Public Inquiry result

Morrich More SSSL Ross and Cromarty

In September 1987 the Secretary of State for Scotland granted outline planning permission to Land and Marine Engineering Ltd for the building of a pipeline assembly corridor and maintenance road along the north west side of the Inver Channel, near the south eastern margin of the SSSI. The decision, which was in line with the Reporter's recommendation following upon a Public Inquiry in 1986, represents a major setback for the NCC and the implications of the case are worthy of examination in some depth

The geomorphological importance of the sand dune and saltrnarsh complex was outlined in Earth science conservation 23 p 24-25, and will not be repeated here. The NCC considered on geomorphoiogical grounds alone that the proposal would be severely damaging but it is important to realise that equally compelling arguments applied on biological grounds. The assembly corridor would in particular threaten the transitional saltmarsh area, where steep gradients of floristic composition exist, and which is a favoured feeding and breeding ground for the bird population In particular a small breeding popUlation of the rare whimbrel woUld be disturbed. For these reasons the NCC fielded a team of expert witnesses, covering all the aspects of the scientific interest, to provide evidence and to brief the NCe's counsel, at the Public Inquiry. This team, by general account, performed impressively not only in describing the features of scientific interest, but also by their ability to make informed and professional comment on the technical aspects of the proposal. AB a resUlt Land and Marine Engineering Ltd were faced with the necessity of changing their ground and deploying further expertise to support their case in the run-up to, and during, the Inquiry.

The effectiveness of the NCe's evidence was reflected in the Reporter's conclusions that there was no doubt of the exceptional value of the SSSI for nature conservation, and that the assembly corridor would pass over a particularly sensitive area. However, he felt that the direct and indirect employment potential of the project in an area of high unemployment was of overriding importance and that the physical disturbance resulting from the project could be minimised by sensitively designed and closely supervised civil engineering works and regular monitoring. The Secretary of State echoed these themes, noting the prospect of 80 direct jobs at a time

when unemployment in the Invergordon area exceeds 22%.

A critical question at the Public Inquiry was that of possible alternative locations for the development The Reporter reached no definite conclusion on this matter and referred it to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State felt that investigation of further sites would be a lengthy and complex process and would involve the need to reopen the Inquiry. He was not aware of any precedent for such a process, believed it would not be practicable and would be likely to expose any eventual decision to a substantial risk of judicial challenge. The Secretary of State concluded that the proposed location is well suited to the unusual requirements of the project

The decision represents a setback for the NCC in its role in protecting SSSIs, and there can be little doubt that the provision of employment and the suitability of the site, in providing a long, flat site with access to relatively deep calm water for launching and towing, were the deciding factors. It is important to recognise however that there are positive aspects, from a conservation viewpoint, to the judgement

Firstly, the Secretary of State indicated in his decision that he intends to designate most of the SSSI, and the adjoining Dornoch Firth SSSI, as a Special Protection Area under the European Community Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds, and furthermore to list the sites under the Rarnsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance in recognition of their role as wintering areas for migratory species

Secondly, the Secretary of State has imposed a lengthy and detailed set of conditions to the planning approval. The strict conditions aim to minimise disturbance resulting from the engineering works and will go some way to safeguarding the geomorphologically sensitive features of the site, such as the naturally formed, sub-surface, parallel drainage pipes Land and Marine Engineering Ltd are further charged to commission and fund a study of the pre-development hydrology and flora of the assembly corridor and to provide annual monitoring reports on the same basis. The remit for this work, and the consultants to be used, are to be agreed with the planning authority and the NCe. The NCC is also afforded on input into planning for the eventual restoration of the site once use of it ceases.

An unusual condition of the planning approval is the requirement that a pipeline contract must be awarded to the company before any works commence. We do not as yet know if Land and Marine Engineering Ltd can meet this condition but we will continue to report on this and other developments as they unfold.

Major casework

The NCe wins Chesil Beach court case

Chesil Beach SSSI

In October 1987 Bridport Magistrates Court found Mr T Richards, owner of part of Chesil Beach, guilty of carrying out two Potentially Damaging Operations (PDOs) at Cogden Beach without prior consultation with the NCe. Mr Richards was fined £750 on each count and ordered to pay the NCC, who brought the prosecution, £1000 costs. The case is the first instance of a successful prosecution for breach of PDO's on an earth science site, and although legal precedents cannot be established in a Magistrates Court, it illustrates the effectiveness of the Wildlife and Countryside Act in the area of enforcement action in situations where the NCe's preferred course of action through negotiation proves fruitless.

Chesil Beach is a site of international renown for coastal geomorphology on account of the exceptional size of the linear storm beach; the systematic size-grading of pebbles and cobbles along shore and for the availability of historical records of beach changes. The beach has been the subject of various development pressures over the years, as reported in ESC 19, p 26; 21, p 45; 23, p 26 and detailed in Dr Alan Carr's article in ESC 20, p 2-10 Gravel extraction from the beach has a long history, possibly over 700 years, but in 1986 it was determined at Public Inquiry that such activities were detrimental to the preservation of the Beach and should cease. This decision was in line with earlier refusals, on the part of Dorset County Council, to grant planning permission for continued extraction at Cogden Beach by Mr Richards.

Under the decision of the Public Inquiry all working of the gravels should have ceased by December 1986 and the NCC could be forgiven for thinking that the matter had finally been brought to a close. However in December the level of activity was dramatically increased with Mr Richard's employing two large front-loading machines in conjunction with a fleet of lorries. Dorset County Council became alarmed at this

n in events and issued Mr Richards with a verbal instruction to cease this illegal operation, followed shortly by Stop and Enforcement Notices. After a period of reflection Mr Richards agreed to cease extraction and attempt to make good the damage by repairing the disturbed beach crest using material from a stockpile which had been established nearby. Although extraction had by now ceased stockpiled

material was still being removed from the site and Dorset County Councl! successfully petitioned the High Court and obtained an injunction preventing Mr Richards from removing any further material from the site.

The NCC was still concerned that the extraction had damaged the natural grading of the beach, and that the restoration, however visually effective, did not restore the site to its original condition. For this reason the NCC decided to initiate a prosecution under Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 on the grounds that regulations governing Potentially Damaging Operations had been breached. Specifically, the NCC alleged that 'modification of natural features by clearance of loose rock or shingle' and 'extraction of minerals including shingle or gravel' had taken place without prior consultation The changes were laid in July 1987 when the case came before Bridport Magistrates Court. Mr Richards pleaded 'not guilty' and a trial date was set for October 1987.

At the court case the NCC had to demonstrate that the pro!!ler procedures had been followed in notifying the site as an SSSI; that Mr Richards was aware of the scientific interest and that the PDOs had been carried out without prior consultation. The NCC produced six witnesses, covering these aspects and the special scientific character of the site. Our case was greatly assisted by being able to call a witness from Dorset County Council who had taken a viueo recording of Mr Richards' extraction operation at its height, which clearly illustrated the scale and scope of the extraction.

Mr Richards was found guilty on the two counts of breaching the PDO procedures, and fined £750 in each instance. This penalty is three-quarters of the maximum fine which could have been imposed. Although the NCC welcomed the outcome, as evidence that we are prepared to resort to legal proceedings to defend sites, it is to be regretted that it was necessary. Wherever possible the NCC prefers to effect the conservation of our natural heritage through negotiation and persuasion.

Cliff collapse endangers apartment block

South Dorset Coast SSSI

Durlston Bay GCR site, which lies within the larger South Dorset Coast SSSI, is the type locality for the Upper Jurassic Purbeck Beds and is internationally

34 35

famous for the diversity of its invertebrate and vertebrate faunas; the reptile and mammal remains being of particular interest. The site has been studied intensely for over one hundred years and is arguably one of Britain's most important stratigraphic and palaeontological localities,

In 1972 it was proposed to build a block of flats adjacent to the rapidly eroding coastline at Durlston Bay, The NCC pointed out the inherent instability of the cliffs, and the fact that this was exacerbated at this particular locality by the presence of a fault running parallel to the cliff edge, In spite of these unfavourable ground conditions planning permission was granted by Purbeck District Council and the flats were constructed with an assurance to the NCC from the architects that "it is not proposed that any work to the cliffs will be necessary nor is itintended that any be carried out within the area scheduled as being of special scientific interest", The NCC had already indicated that it would strenuously object to any proposals to stabilise the cliff,

Some flfteen years on successive falls have pushed the cliff line back to within a metre or so of the building's foundation to the understandable alarm of the Council and more particularly the owners and occupiers of the flats. The Council commissioned an investigation by a flrm of consulting engineers, and their report, produced in November 1986, outlined a number of proposed coastal protection measures designed to remedy the situation. Purbeck District Council made an application

to pursue this scheme and informed the NCC in its role of statutory consultee. The NCC, in line with its earlier statements on the subject, strongly opposed the proposals. The Secretary of State for the Environment, once appraised of the NCe's objections, issued an Article 10 Direction which effectively prevented the District Council, as the agency changed with responsibility for coastal protection, from granting itself planning permission for the scheme,

The NCC, aware of the political difficulties which could ensure from objecting to remedial works in a case where the problems were so evidently acute, decided to commission an independent appraisal from Sir Alexander Gibb and Partners to review the problem and the Council's proposed remedial works. The findings were alarming in the extreme, indicating that the factor of safety for the existing situation was as low as 0,51. A factor of safety less than unity is an indication that a slope or structure is liable to failure. Equally disturbing was the assessment that the Council's scheme, once in place, would produce a factor of only 0,80, and was consequently inadequate to address the problem effectively, These fmdings were conveyed by the NCC to the other interested parties as a matter of urgency, and as a result Purbeck District Couricil and their consultants have agreed to re-examine their scheme. It is hoped that further discussions will produce a revised scheme which, while assisting to stabilise the block of flats, will avoid damage to the scientiflc interest of the site,

Slumped cliff at Durlston Bay.

36

River diversion to save Quaternary section Nith Bridge SSSI, Cumnock and Doon

Nith Bridge is an important Quaternary site for interpreting the pattern of movement of ice sheets during the Late Devensian, Three till deposits are preserved in the river bank section, some 7m in height, which has been cut by the River Nith. The two lowermost tills were deposited by Highland ice sweeping southwards from the Firth of Clyde, whereas the upper till was deposited by ice originating from the Southern Uplands, The section thus provides a splendid example of the results of the coalescence and interaction of two independent ice masses,

Strathclyde Regional Council has expressed concern for a number of years over the rapid bank erosion in these unconsolidated sedirnents, which is now threatening to undermine a minor road which runs adjacent to the river and underneath which are located electricity cables and water mains, The Council initially proposed to stabilise the bank by constructing a gabion wall at its base, This would have obscured the lower exposures, and in time would have encouraged vegetation to take hold on the upper part as well, At the NCe's suggestion an alternative option of diverting the road away from the bank was considered, but the Council pointed out that the cost would be prohibitive. The Council proved more receptive to a further ~on - that of diverting the course of the river, by means of a pre-cut channel, away from its present position, The NCC and the Council are now jointly pursuing details of this scheme. Although the Quaternary section will no longer be kept fresh by continued erosion, it will nonetheless remain available for study as a result of this llTIaginative compromise. The NCC wish to thank Strathclyde Regional Council for their co-operation on this matter.

Coastal protection threat to Northumberland Quaternary site Sandy Bay SSSI, Northumberland

Sandy Bay is an important Quaternary site for the study of glacial till. It shows the fullest development of Late Devensian till on the Northumbrian coast, and many of the characteristics of lodgement deposition. The till rests partly on a striated shore platform and partly on glacially disturbed bedrock.

At the northern end of the section the cliff is to some extent protected from erosion by the boulder-strewn rock platform, but in the south the coastline is serrated where the sea has carved out a series of sl')1all embayments. The landowner and the manager of a

37

coastal caravan park, concerned at the relatively rapid rate of erosion, recently approached the NCC with a view to agreeing a method of coastal protection which would reduce the rate of cliff retreat. The NCC is examining various options which might meet the needs of the owner and occupiers without significantly damaging the scientific interest.

Ballantrae road works monitored Girvan to Ballantrae coast SSSI, Kyle and Carrick

The coastal outcrops between Girvan and Ballantrae provide a classic cross-section through the Ordovician Ballantrae Complex, which consists of three belts of pillow lavas and associated sediments, separated from each other by ultramafic intrusive rocks. The complex shows many of the features of an obducted ophiolite although geochemical studies indicate that the various igneous rocks were generated in a variety of tectonic settings and have since been tectonically juxtaposed,

In 1984 the Scottish Development Department consulted the NCC over proposals for a major road improvement scheme for the A77 Glasgow to Stranraer trunk road, which would impinge on part of the Ballantrae SSSI. The NCC voiced particular concern over the stretch between Kennedy's Pass and Slo'ckenray, where the road follows a narrow and winding route immediately above coastal exposures, The proposals here necessitated widening and straightening of the existing road by means of constructing supporting embankments on the seaward side. This section has been studied in detail in recent years and has provided important new evidence for a shallow-water origin for the volcaniclastic rocks present there. Fortunately the most important exposures occur on the foreshore and it became clear that they would be unaffected by the proposals,

Throughout the period of engineering works in late 1986 and 1987 the NCC closely monitored progress and successfully limited construction activity on the foreshore, At one juncture it proved necessary to construct a temporary access route down to the shore but this was removed once the necessary works had been completed. Some damage was done inadvertantly to a fossiliferous locality on the landward side of the road and outwith the SSSI boundary, However, the contractors, once the NCC had pointed out the importance of the exposure, were careful to ensure that no further damage occurred,

The roadworks are continuing southwards, and are unlikely to significantly damage the geological interest in that direction but the NCC will keep a watching brief on the situation. Igneous SSSIs are not usually as vulnerable as many other categories of sites to

development threats of this type, but the Ballantrae case was an example where the public need for safe roads impinged closely on the geological interest as a result of the peculiarites of the local topography. The NCe's involvement ensured that the damage to outcrops, which could not be totally avoided, was minimised and that the most critical outcrops were protected.

Threat to Tertiary palaeontological site Colwell Bay SSSI, Isle of Wight

The cliffs at Colwell Bay provide important exposures of the Headon Hill Formation, of Eocene age, and the section is noted for its abundant and diverse marine and freshwater fauna, especially molluscs. Over one hundred species of molluscs have been reported to occur in the 'Venus Bed'. The Linstone Chine Member is internationally famous for its palaeobotanical interest and over forty species of plants have been recorded, including flowering plants, conifers and ferns, and for eight of these species this is the type locality.

In 1978 a Public Inquiry was held to consider an application to extend the holiday camp complex which , lies immediately inland from the SSSI. At that time, as reported in ESC 15, P 22; 17, p 16, the NCC presented evidence to demonstrate the active recession of the cliffs as a result of marine erosion and pointed out that the cliff has already been cut back to within 50 feet of the most seaward of the existing chalets. The construction of permanent buildings close to a receding cliff-line inevitably leads to a demand for the erection of coast prote<.:;tion works to prevent property and lives being placed in jeopardy and the erection of such works just as inevitably leads to the deterioration and eventual loss of the cliff exposures. The NCC's case was backed up with letters of support from the many academics with an interest in the site, and on the basis

of these representations and other considerations the application was refused. However the accuracy of the NCe's argument in predicting future demand for coastal protection works has recently been demonstrated The SSSI is under renewed threat with a proposal by South Wight Borough Council to lay a breastwork of concrete blocks at the cliff toe over a 200m stretch along the holiday camp frontage.

The NCC has proposed that alternative schemes, which would go some way to reconciling the need to slow down the rate of coastal retreat with the requirement to protect the geological exposures, should be investigated. A combination of beach replenishment and groyne construction would probably have the desired effect but would not be cost-effective in terms of the guidelines laid down by central government. As a result it would not attract grant aid from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in its role in funding coastal protection works. For this reason the Council are unable to consider such a scheme further.

The NCC has now formally objected to the proposals and unless a satisfactory method of conserving the geological interest, within the Council's engineering proposals, can be found then the proposals will inevitably have to be considered at a Public Inquiry.

Cretaceous brachiopod site protected High Wycombe Pit SSSI, Buckinghamshire

High Wycombe pit is an exceptionally important late Cretaceous Chalk fossil site, which shows an abundant, varied and well preserved marine fauna dominated by both 'rhynchonelloid' and 'terebratuloid' brachiopods, as well as showing abundant remains of burrowing organisms. The fossil-bearing horizon is found relatively high up on the walls of the old quarry, along the western side of the site.

Colwell Bay SSSl

Linstone Chine Hohdaycamp Brambles Chine N S

/

Existing

. ' .... :'.'::- :.'.-:. , ,,':.' . -:,:.;::..•.:;..;

Venus bed OysterPlant bedSea wall Proposed breastwork

bed breastwork

Sea wall 5mL Groyne Groyne Groyne

50m

In January 1987 the NCC was approached by Hunting Gate Group concerning the building of a large industrial unit and warehouse complex on the floor of the disused pit. Part of the floor of the old quarry had previously been given over to use as a carpark, but in the 1960s this was extended by infilling with industrial waste from a local foundry, to the level of the adjacent Hughenden ,Avenue. Indications from the plans were that the new unit was to be sited close to the western side of the site and therefore adjacent to the fossil­bearing exposures.

On-site inspection revealed that pits had been prepared for the footings in one area close to the fossiliferous exposures. At meetings between the representatives of the developers and the NCC, the scientific value of the exposures was explained. As a result the building was repositioned such that the north-western corner of the unit remained adjacent to the exposure, but the remainder of the western side of the unit was angled away from the exposures. In this way access to the site from the southern side remains unimpaired for palaeontological purposes. In addition, the developers undertook to clear the faces of part of the exposure adjacent to the new units and to improve access to the base of the exposure.

In all the development now seems to represent an excellent compromise between the scientific requirement for unhindered access to the faces and the need of the developers to position the unit as cloSilto the western limit of the site as possible, in order to maximise the forecourt parking area.

Impasse over Welsh Pleistocene site Carmarthen Bay SSSI, Dyfed

Exposures at Broughton Bay reveal a sequence of deposits which can be used to date major geomorphological events and changing environmental conditions in South Wales during the Late Pleistocene The deposits comprise raised beach, till, soliflucted till and head, colluvium and blown sand Amino acid dating suggests that the raised beach at Broughton Bay was probably formed during the Ipswichian Interglacial, while the till was deposited during the Devensian. The site also provides information concerning the maximum extent of Devensian ice over west Gower and Carrnarthen Bay. From a structural viewpoint the deposits show a fine display of glaciotectonic structures, the precise origin of which remains uncertain, and also infilled cracks which may reflect periglacial processes during the Late Devensian. Flandrian dune sands overlying the Pleistocene sedirnents provide a further feature of mterest.

In recent years rapid coastal erosion has led the landowner at Broughton Bay to implement makeshift protection measures designed to safeguard his property. These have involved the laying in early 1987 of blockstone -locally derived blocks of Carboniferous Limestone - in the form of a revetment at the base of the cliffs. The NCC has attempted to resolve this unsatisfactory situation through discussions with the owner and the local planning authority, but the owner, who perceives his property and livelihood to be stake, has refused to remove the blockstones. The NCC's concern is heightened by the fact that the quality of the exposure is deteriorating through mass wasting and vegetation as marme erosion is no longer keeping the section fresh.

In an attempt to research the problem in greater depth the NCC commissioned a reconnaissance study, by Geo Sea Consulting Ltd, of the erosion problem and its impact on the geomorphology of the site. The report indicates that the blockstone wall will offer little protective effect, and may indeed actively promote erosion of the foreshore. The difficulty however is that alternative methods of coastal defence, such as the building of a breakwater to alter wave refraction around Twlc Point, would be costly and could have significant implications for coastal stability along adjoining stretches of coastline, For this reason it is essential that the hydraulics and associated sediment movements in Carrnarthen Bay as a whole are taken into account. Just such a study has recently been proposed by the Welsh Office and a consortium of local authorities and the NCC is keen to participate. It is hoped that this wider study will provide a basis for resolving the current impasse at Broughton Bay to the satisfaction of both the landowner and the NCe.

Bishopstone Cliffs agreement in jeopardy Bishopstone Cliffs SSSl, Kent

Bishopstone Cliffs, on the north Kent coast, provide classic exposures spanning the Palaeocene-Eocene boundary, and the locality is one of Britain's most important palaeobotanical sites. The unrivalled Tertiary floral succession spans the Thanet-Woolwich­Oldhaven-London Clay interval and yields the only unequivocal Palaeocene floras in Britain.

The protracted history of the NCe's efforts to protect the site in the face of strong pressures for coastal defence works have been reported in previous issues of this journal (ESC 20, p19; 21, p33, 22, p55). Following a period of lengthy and often difficult negotiations between the NCC and Canterbury City Council, an important breakthrough was made when, in 1984, the NCC and the City Council signed an agreement which offered the prospect of successfully reconciling the

3938

conflicting requirements of geological conservation and coastal protection. Under the agreement the existing main cliff exposures would be retained behind an energy-absorbing block apron covering the upper foreshore. Cliff-fall debris which could be expected to accumulate at the base of the cliffs would be removed so as not to obscure the exposures. A further important element was the City Council's express commitment to designate the cliffs a Local Nature Reserve to enable the site to be sympathetically managed for the purposes of geological and biological conservation The NCC had grounds for optimism that the agreement offered a sound basis for the future safeguard of the site.

Regrettably the course of events since 1984 has not proved smooth The City Council has yet to designate the site as a Local Nature Reserve, and implementation of the agreed coastal protection measures has also led to difficulties. The block apron on completion is some 30m longer than specified in the original plan, and is extended eastwards by a further 130m in the form of a clay embankment which did not figure in the original scheme and over which the NCC was not consulted. The dumping of the clay has obscured a significant amount of rock exposure.

The NCC has had further discussions with the City Council and is particularly concerned that the slumped debris behind the apron, and the clay embankment, be removed No progress has been made on the former issue as the City Council now argues that removal of the slumped debris may undermine the stability of the cliffs. Provisional agreement has been reached however over cutting a trench through the clay embankment to facilitate more rapid removal of materialpy wave action More broadly the NCC is of the opinion that the agreement was signed in good faith by both parties with a realistic expectation that its contents would be enforced, and it is our intention to ensure that the terms of the agreement, both in detail and in spirit, should be adhered to.

Site management

Site clearance

South Elmsall Quarry SSSI

A fine example of a stromatolite reef in the Upper Permian Lower Magnesian Limestone of West Yorkshire is present in South Elmsall Quarry (ESC 20, p27; 21, p9-10). In 1985 West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council purchased the site for conservation purposes and set out to improve its condition and appearance. The work undertaken included installing a notice board describing the geological interest, tree and shrub planting, laying out paths and erecting seats The site, which with the demise of the metropohtan county councils is now owned by West Yorkshire County Council, is in excellent condition and was formally opened to the public in 1986. The NCC wishes to congratulate the Council on their conservation efforts

The condition of the site is being monitored by Mr Roy Osborn of Yorkshire Geological Society as part of the NCe's informal site adoption scheme.

Site access

Hannaborough Quany SSSI, Devon

An important exposure of lamprophyric lava belonging to the poorly-exposed Exeter Volcanic Series outcrops in Hannaborough quarry. A further major feature of interest is a breccia which has been variously interpreted as a vent agglomerate and a debris flow.

In recent years vegetation has been encroaching upon the outcrops and the NCC and the tenant of Hannaborough Farm are pursuing a management agreement to cover the future maintenance of the site. The farmer, Mr R Mackenzie, is keen to facilitate continued access to the site for geologists but is concerned that acts of vandalism by hammer-wielding students to disused cars on the site should not be repeated. It has now been agreed that bona fide geolOgiSts and educational parties may visit the site provided that permission is requested in advance from the NCC, 49 Brook Street, Tavistock, telephone number (0822) 612292. Access is subject to the further provisions that party leaders undertake to supervise student behaviour on site, and that visits should preferably occur between Mondays and Fridays.

eoten End Quarry SSSI, Warwickshire

Coten End Quarry has been known since the nineteenth century as the source of a unique assemblage of Middle Triassic terrestrial vertebrates. The fauna represents the broadest range of reptile of this age in Britain, including Rhyncosaurus, and occurs within the normally unfossiliferous Bromsgrove Sandstone Formation, formerly the Keuper Sandstone.

ThlS site has now passed into the hands of a new owner who intends to clean up the faces by removing garden refuse tipped in from adjoining houses and cutting back scrub growth. To prevent illicit dumping the gates are to be locked and access permission and a key will be required for geologists who wish to visit the quarry.

Requests should be directed to the new owner, Mrs W Vaughan, at 21 Mallory Road, Bishops Tachbrook, Warwick, CV33 9QX.

Halfway Quarry SSSI, Powys

Halfway Quarry, also known as CapeI Horeb Quarry, is anrunportant site for stratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental studies at the base of the Old Red Sandstone in Wales, with a sequence spanning the Ludlow, Downtonian and basal Devonian strata. It is an internationally important palaeobotanicallocality, providing evidence of the earl1est vascular land plants.

The present owners recently became concerned about the high levels of usage of the site by visiting geologists given the unsafe condition of some of the faces, and for this reason felt obl1ged to refuse access. Following discussions with the NCC the owners have relented in part and will now permit access for research geologists provided they obtain written permission in advance from the NCC, Deauville, Spa Road, Llandrindod Wells, Powys, LD1 5EY. .

Wotton Hill SSSI, Gloucestershire

Wotton Hill quarries provide an almost complete section through the Inferior Ool1te of the south Cotswolds. Of particular interest is the Cephalopod Bed which has a notably rich ammonite fauna.

In 1986 the owner contacted the NCC and expressed concern over continuing trespass by parties of geologists. He was especially worried that collecting of fossils was undermining the stability of the rock faces, and about his l1abil1ty should a rockfall result in serious injury. The NCC and the owner, Mr S P Hodsman, are in agreement that intending visitors must request

41 40

permission in writing in advance. Please write to Mr Hodsman, clo Grossmans Solicitors, 12 The Plain, Thornbury, Bristol BSl2 2BE.

Gribun Shore SSSI. lugyll and Bute

Gribun Shore, on the western coast of Mull, is a classic locality for geological parties visiting the island. The unconformity between the Moine rocks and the overlying Triassic red beds is superbly exposed and the site is also significant for palaeoenvironmental studies of the Triassic seciiments, Rhaetic sandstone and Upper Cretaceous silicified chalk.

Gribun Shore SSSI Isle of Mull lfJfJ

o o

~ o o

Bogha nan Cruban

A N

£:.' -)Vo'-,// -"'_ 0 (r'

~O f#';"~ ~01V£:? ,.~~~~ o ,r-­

o ' 1f2km I I

= stile main approach roads • signposts - - - - - - agreed access footpath

In 1986 Mr I MacFadyen, the tenant who farms the adjoining fields, complained to the NCC about the behaviour of geologists who take short cuts across arable land. The NCC and Mr MacFadyen have agreed to regularise the routes that geologists can take by means of signposts, stiles and clearly marked pathways, as indicated on the accompanying map. The NCC is grateful to Mr MacFadyen for permitting geologists continued access to the shore but would remind all visitors that they must observe the courtesy of calling at Balmeanach to ask permission before using the path to the shore

Excavation on the trench in the tufa deposits, Holywell Coombe

o

,* Please call at house for permission to use access footpath

Site-related research

Holywell Coombe rescue excavation Holywell Coombe SSSI, Kent

Holywell Coombe, near Folkestone, is a key locality for Late Devensian and Flandrian tufa deposits, containing fossil molluscs, plant remains and beetles. In the last issue of Earth science conservation we reported Eurotunnel's agreement to fund a large-scale rescue dig to investigate the site prior to major engineering works for the Channel Tunnel destroying much of it. During the late suillmer of 1987 Phase One of the excavation was successfully accomplished by a team of scientists led by Dr Richard Preece of Cambridge University

Phase One involved the drilling of 150 further boreholes in a series of transects across the area, The aim of the borehole survey was to provide a more detailed picture of the three-dimensional nature of these highly variable late Devensian and Flandrian deposits. Each core was logged and samples were taken from those providing a

record of lateral changes in the lithostratigraphy or where biostratigraphic analyses of the fossils in the cores could be used for correlation.

A large trench, 40m x 8m x 2m deep, was also cut in order that the detailed lateral variation within the deposits could be examined in open sections. Two smaller trenches were cut within the larger trench so that the full depth of the deposit could be examined and sampled.

As part of the project a detailed archaeological excavation was undertaken by the Canterbury Trust for Archaeology. This involved the careful and painstaking excavation of the upper 2m of the sequence. Artifacts have been recovered from all levels but of particular interest are those from the Iron Age, Bronze Age and Neolithic levels.

The NCC is presently awaiting the go ahead for a second phase of field work involving the construction of further deep trenches in key areas identified in the borehole survey..

42 43

Archaeological excavation in the upper levels of the sequence, Holywell Coombe.

Trenched cross-section through the upper levels of the deposit, Holywell Coombe.

44

Hanover Point - St Catherines Point SSSI Cambridge Greensand - a gap in the GCR

This stretch of the Isle of Wight coast is important for itscoverage Cretaceous stratigraphic and palaeontological interest. A couple of years ago Nick Chase, a graduate biologist and keen fossil collector, chanced upon dinosaur

ContinentaL as distinct from marine, deposits of mid­ fragments exposed after a recent cliff fall. The material Cretaceous age are rare in Brita~n, and no sites to collected proved to belong to the iguanodon species I represent them are as yet included in the GCR athemeldensis and although the skeleton was coverage. However, a literature review of the work incomplete it included both hindlirnbs and the pelvis as done by Richard Owen, T H Huxley and Harry Govier well as many vertebrae, ribs and most importantly, a Seeley in the 1860s and 1870s suggests that a modern very fine skull. The skull is largely complete although review of Upper Greensand sites in the Cambridge broken into a number of pieces and it has proved area could be most rewarding. In the late nineteenth possible, unlike many such occurrences, to investigate century a considerable collection of fossil material was the interior with relative ease, Dr Dave Norman of the made in the phosphate washings of the villages of NCC is currently preparing a detailed monograph on Barnwell, Boston, Haslingfield, Reach and 'I'rurnpington the cranial morphology of I atherfieldensis and this in the Cambridge area. Most of the material is now in new specimen has provided the basis for the best and the Sedgwick Museum in Cambridge and includes the most accurate reconstruction yet of the species. remains of dinosaurs, crocodiles, lizards, pterosaurs, birds and even some stray plesiosaur and ichthyosaur Smokejack SSSI remams.

Smokejack brick pit in Surrey is renowned as the most prolific reptile site in the Lower Cretaceous Weald The fauna is particularly important for its dinosaurs and Clay, and in 1986 lived up to its reputation with the ten species belonging to the genera Acanthopholis, discovery of a new family of dinosaur. The discovery byAnoplosaurus, Macrurosaurus, Eucerosaurus, an amateur fossil collector, Mr William Walker, of a Syngonosaurus and Trachodon. The latter genus is large claw led to a major excavation by staff of the represented by T cantabrigensiswhich is believed to British Museum (Natural History) and to the naming of be the earliest representative of the Hadrosauridae, or the animal as Baryonyx walken, although the popular duck-billed dinosaurs, which became extremely pr~ss continued to prefer the name "Claws".abundant and diverse in North America and east j\Sla

in late Cretaceous times but remained curiously rare Alan Charig and Angela Milner have described theelsewhere. Very recently, Peter Wellnhofer of Munich fossil animal as a new and extremely unusual has reported Brazilian pterosaurs which seem carnivorous dinosaur, the like of which has not beenremarkably similar to the species described by Owen encountered before. Apart from the large claw, which and Seeley from the Cambridge Greensand, Both of may have belonged to either the front or back feet, the these taxa seem to be characterised by a curiously skull is unusually long and flat, rather in the manner of a wedge-shaped tip to the snout. crocodiles', with the teeth at the tip of the snout being somewhat larger and splayed outward in rosetteIn recognition of the increased attention which dinosaur fashion. Furthermore there is a strong suspicion that the and pterosaur research is focussing on the Cambridge animal moved around on all fours, unlike its typically Greensand, the NCC and the University of Cambridge bipedal carnivorous relations, and may have been aare considering possible ways of documenting the fish-eater. The enlarged claw, if attached to the front Greensand localities and re-excavating some of the foot, could have served as a gaff for catching fish, andmore promising localities. this is supported by evidence of fish scales of a large fish named Lepidotes in the area of the rib cage of the skeleton. An alternative interpretation has been

Recent palaeontological discoveries proposed by Andrew Kitchener, of Reading University, onGCRsites who has suggested that the animal was a scavenger

rather than an active predator and that the large claws were used to tear through the hide of dead dinosaurs,

It is always pleasing when discoveries highlight the research potential of SSSIs and vindicate their selection as GCR sites, Two such instances are described below and draw attention to the value of strong relations between amateur fossil collectors and the scientific community.

45

Field education

New BurratOI and Wenlock Edge trails published

We are pleased to announce that the new Burrator Dartmoor landform trail and the Wenlock Edge geology teaching trail have now been published. The trails, which were described in some detail in ESC 23 p46, are the latest in our series of earth science teaching trails and details of how to obtain your copies are given at the end of this issue.

Public participation in geological conservation

Since the last issue of Earth science conservation, we have had many requests for copies of our mformation pack entitled Help conserve geology. This pack was originally produced for distribution at the Association of Teachers of Geology conference at the University of Bath in September 1986 and is now out of print. We intend to cover the subject matter of the pack with items and articles in fuhrre issues of Earth science conservation but in response to requests, we are reproducing an .edited version of the text below and this outlines the two main areas in which interested groups or individuals can become involved.

Infonnal site adoption ESC 22 p 23-24, ESC 23 p 36

Earth scientists in the NCC are frequently involved with clearing exposures which have become overgrown or buried beneath weathered debris. Such exposures are cleared for two reasons; firstly to aid research in the selection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest and secondly to provide alternative localities suitable for educational fieldwork. Over 250 exposures have been cleared to date, many of them in disused quarries and railway cuttings.

A recent survey into the condition of exposures cleared specifically for educational fieldwork found that many were showing signs of deterioration The majority could easily be restored and it is in this area that groups of volunteers are being encouraged to take an active role. We are currently developing a nationwide informal site adoption scheme involving volunteers from schools,

46

colleges, universities, geological societies and county trusts for nahrre conservation and hope that groups will take responsibility for selected sites in their own areas. Regular site visits are needed to monitor deterioration and vandalism, and to carry out simple maintenance tasks These might involve cutting back vegetation or clearing loose talus and downwashed soil from rock faces. It should be remembered that talus slopes may be a useful source of material for collecting or provide a means of examining the higher parts of a rock face, and should not be removed as a matter of course. It must also be emphasised that the landowners consent must always be obtained before any work is carried out and that, as with all earth science fieldwork, each group is responsible for its own insurance arrangements.

Preparation of geological site description sheets ESC 23, p 44-45

In many areas of Britain, important and well-known geological and geomorphological SSSIs are being damaged by the large numbers of earth scientists visiting them each year. To conserve over-visited sites, the NCC tries to find similar localities which are suitable for teaching purposes. Details of these alternative sites are published in field guides or teaching trails as site description sheets.

The first project on this type was carried out in Mortimer Forest near Ludlow in 1976. Mortimer Forest is of international importance as the type area for the Silurian Ludlow series and also receives heavy educational use. Thirteen small quarries were cleared as alternative localities for fieldwork and these form the basis of an educational trail examining the whole of the Ludlow series. A similar, but more widespread, project was completed in 1985 in the east Mendips. Here 39 localities, covering all aspects of Mendip geology from the Lower Palaeozoic to the Pleistocene, were selected as being suitable for educational study and these have been described in a field guide.

There is a growing need for information about new fieldwork localities in Britain, particularly sites suitable for elementary study in GCSE Science courses. We believe that local geologists, whether amateur or professional, teachers or students, can play an important role here. By using local knowledge, museum records and published literahrre, suitable sites can be selected and descriptions prepared. These descriptions could take the form of single information sheets and if submitted to the NCC, could be published as part of our new 'geological site description sheet'

series and distributed with forthcoming issues of Earth science conservation.

For further information, advice and guidance about either of these valuable areas of voluntary conservation work please contact Mike Harley at the Earth Science Division of the NCe.

Geological site description sheets

In ESC 23 p 44-45 readers were introduced to a new educational initiative on the part of the NCC, when we produced three geological site description sheets as the first examples of a new series intended to promote the struchrred use of selected geological and geomorphologicallocalities for educational field work.

The attentive reader, however, will have noticed that in the accompanying article we stated that four such sheets were enclosed. The reason that the fourth sheet had to be omitted was due to an unforeseen site access problem which arose shortly before the journal was due for distribution Unfortunately, despite lengthy discussion with the landowner, it has not proved possible to agree access arrangements and the NCC has been asked to state that the site, Stoney Littleton Quarries near Radstock in Avon, is no longer availc;)lle for study.

47

Conservation news

Earth science conservation in Roumania

In July 1987, Dr Dave Norman, the NCC palaeontologist, visited Rownania on a scientific exchange sponsored by the Royal Society and the Rownanian Academy. While the visit was primarily concerned with a collaborative palaeontological research project on the late Cretaceous Maastrichtian vertebrate fmma of Transylvania, Dr Norman was keen to learn more of attitudes to geological conservation in the People's Republic.

Although the NCC is abreast of geological conservation efforts in Western Europe and North America, comparatively little is known about earth science conservation in some of the East European states. Whilst in Bucharest Dave Norman was introduced to Dr Dan Grigorescu of the Faculty of Geology and Geography at Bucharest University, who leads an active and enthusiastic group of conservationists concerned with monitoring geological sites. At present the group is very much in its infancy, having only been formed two years ago, and working largely on a voluntary basis. However the group are compiling a database which will be of immense value in future years as the pressures from development and urbanisation exert their increasing effects upon Roumania's countryside.

"

It is hoped that Dr Grigorescu will be able to visit England as part of a reciprocal research exchange in the future and that his visit will offer a further opportunity to learn about the Rownanian perspective on earth science conservation.

BGS announces 1988 Open Day dates

Following the outstanding success of the Open Days held by the British Geological Survey in 1985 and 1986, when over ten thousand people attended at Keyworth alone, further Open Days are now planned between May and October 1988. The dates where known are as follows and opening hours will be between 1000 and 1700 hours:

Keyworth - Thursday 5, Friday 6 and Sunday 8 May Newcastle - Thursday 5, Friday 6 and Sunday 8 May Exeter- Thursday 12, Friday 13 and Saturday 14 May

48

London (Grays Inn Road) - Friday 20 and Saturday 21 May Aberystwyth - Thursday 14, Friday 15 and Saturday 16 July Edinburgh - Friday 28, Saturday 29 and Sunday 30 October

Described as "splendid examples to the general public of geology in action" and as "immensely valuable to the profession as a whole", the exhibits and demonstrations are designed to entertain as well as enlighten and all members of the general public will be welcome.

For further details and confirmation of dates and times please contact Dr Brian Taylor at BGS Keyworth telephone number 06077 - 6111 extension 3392.

Brownend Quarry becomes nature reserve Brownend Quarry SSSI, Staffordshire

Brownend Quarry, an important geological site near Waterhouses, is the first new reserve announced since the launch of the Staffordshire Wilcllife Appeal in April 1987 The site is of national importance for its sequence of Lower Carboniferous rocks, and is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest. It is the fIrst geolOgical reserve to come under the control of the Staffordshire Nature Conservation Trust, and only the 46th county trust geological reserve in Britain.

The quarry exposes the oldest Dinantian rocks in the Derbyshire/north Staffordshire region, and the steeply dipping sequence of Chadian to Asbian age appears to lack the intervening Arundian and Holkerian stages. The site shows what has been interpreted as a condensed sequence, with the development of reef limestones in an otherwise basinal situation. Some horizons are fossiliferous and examples of corals, brachiopods, crinoids, conodonts and trace fossils can be seen in situ and in fallen blocks. The site has immense research potential but is also particularly suitable for educational purposes. The steeply dipping strata provide easily accessible and identifiable rock units and the site is much visited by fieldwork parties.

Purchase of the quarry has been made possibly by contributions from a range of bodies including the NCC, Peak District National Park, Staffordshire Moorlands District Council, the Geologists' Association and the Geological Society of London. A further £5000

must now be raised to enable the Trust to complete the purchase and carry out essential management and public interpretation, including the removal of debris from the site.

It is intended that the reserve will be opened to visitors by appointment in 1988, and shortly thereafter freely available to the public once interpretive facilities have been installed. Intending visitors should contact John Drewett on 08897 534 for access permission and further information.

.;;/<

49

Earth science conservation - index for issues 1 to 23

We present below an index for issues 1 to 23 inclusive of Earth science conservation; Issues 1 to 14 originally appeared under the title Information Circular. The index is in four parts as follows:­

Geographical index: lists place names according to country and county or, in the case of Scotland, districts. The term Greater London is retained for convenience. The listing is not fully comprehensive but includes all significant references to localities.

Geological index: this listing is intended to assist readers in determining which localities fall into the geological subject area of particular interest to them It cannot be fully comprehensive as, for example, most stratigraphic sites will of course have a palaeontological interest as well. For this reason cross reference is included where appropriate to assist readers.

Subject index: this index is designed to assist readers in locating items relating to various recurring themes, such as GCR site selection progress, or development issues such as coastal protection.

Featured articles: listed chronologically accordingly to issue number.

Each entry consists of the volume numbers, indicated in bold, followed by the page number(s).

Geographical index

England

Avon

Barnhill Quarry 119; 12 12, 14; 1310; 1422; 1523; 2265 Burrington Coombe 21 40-41; 23 36 Cherry Gardens Railway Cutting 22 24, 26; 23 45 Cropthorne 23 42 Downhead Quarry 22 24 Dundry 179 Goblin Combe 21 40, 41; 23 36 Hinton Charterhouse 139, 10; 15 19 Pennyquick Bridge 21 46; 23 36 Severn 1925 Tucking Mill Railway Cutting 22 60

Bedfordshire

Biddenham 23 43 Oakley Railway Junction Pit 6 5; 9 6

50

Berkshire

Boxford Chalk Pit 22 23; 23 33 Brimpton Pit 2141 Cold Ash Sand Pit 17 10 Dry Sandford Pit 3 1, 5 Faringdon Pits 4 3 Little Coxwell Pit 4 3 Pincent's Kiln Pit 87; 12 12; 13 10; 15 19 Thatcham Reed Beds 1315

Buckinghamshire

Bugle Quarry 1 2; 2 6; 13 7; 22 24 Pitstone Quarry 1426 Woodham Brickpit 45, 75; 8 7; 96; 21 27-28; 2244-45

Cambridgeshire

Warboys Pit 2267 Woodditton Chalk Pit 65 Woodwalton Fen 11 8

Cheshire

Abbots Moss 1425; 1526 Alderley Edge 20 46; 21 26, 27 West Mine see Alderley Edge

Cleveland

Langbaurgh Quarry 11 10

Cornwall

Gwithian Dunes 13 11 Lidcott Mine 23 33 Millook Haven 15 5 St Erth Sand Pits 1422; 1624; 17 17

Cumbria

Car Ghyll 95 Cracoe Reef Knolls 10 10; 12 16 Cross Fell-Appleby Fell 10 10 Eskdale 23 36 Farleton Knott 3 2; 4 3; 11 3 High Skelghyll Farm 10 9 Hilton Beck 89; 20 14, 15 Hollows Farm 8 8; 17 24 Hutton Roof Crag 10 9 Lancaster Hole - Ease Gill Cave System 22 59 Leck Beck 22 59 Longstone Common 22 58 Moor House 4 7; 9 5 Roughton Gill 23 36 Shap Aqueduct 10 10-11

Skelghyll Beck 2144 Swindale Beck 47; 7 7; 9 5 Tebay 411 Wasdale Screes 18 17 Wet Shine Gill 2336 Whitefield Cottage Quarry 5 6

Devon

Axmouth - Lyme Regis 7 3; 19 28; 23 34 Baker's Pit Cave - Buckfastleigh Caves 13 15; 1723 Braunton Burrows 12 14; 13 14 Burrator 23 46 Burrator Quarry 14 18; 1526; 189; 192, 8; 2029 Chipley Quarries 19 40 Higher Kiln Quarry 5 3 Meldon Aplite Quarry 4 4 Pengelly Caves 1 2; 53; 12 17; 13 16; 21 43 Taw-Torridge Estuary 1922; 2045; 2269 Tolcis Quarry 44; 10 12; 11 11; 2023 Torbay Cliffs 18 19 Wilrnington Quarry 8 8

Derbyshire

Calton Hill Quarry 10 9; 11 10; 12 17; 13 6 Castleton (Cow Low Nick) 6 3 Creswell Crags 16 25 Duckmanton Railway Cutting 119; 13 14; 14 18; 20

21-23; 2134, 35; 2261 River Doe Lea 22 63; 23 27

Dorset

Axmouth - Lyme Regis 7 3; 19 28; 23 34 Black Ven - Church Cliffs 7 3 Bournemouth Cliffs 23 26 Bowleaze Cove - St Albans Head 8 7 Chalbury Quarry 1811 Charmouth 1919,40; 2040,41,42 Chesil Beach, Portland and the Fleet 46; 93; 13 11; 14

24; 1626; 1926; 203-9; 2145-46; 2326, 39 Crookhill Brickpit 1723; 2267 Cullpeppers Dish 8 11 Furzy Cliff - Peveril Point 1926, 27; 21 31 Hartland Moor 1427 Isle of Portland 88; 12 16; 13 14; 1426 Lulworth (Fossil Forest) 5 5; 10 6, 9 Lyme Regis 7 3 Oborne Quarry 179 Sherborne Quarry 179 The Valley of Stones 8 11 Upwey Quarries 1810 West Coast of Dorset 2326

Durham

East Thickley Quarry 13 12, 13 Middridge Quarry 1524; 199,31

Essex

Globe Pit 2139, 40; 2237

Hadleigh Castle 19 28 Halls Quarry 23 34 Hornchurch Railway Cutting 19 35; 21 42 Lion Pit 22 37, 38 Little Oakley 22 36 Maldon Railway Cutting 22 38 Purfleet Chalk Pits 23 29 Walton-on-the-Naze 11 9; 13 11-12; 1425-26; 1525; 16

23; 175, 15-16; 2331

Gloucestershire

Barnhill Quarry 119; 12 12, 14; 1310; 1422; 1523; 2265 Birdlip Quarry 62 Chedworth Woods Railway Cutting 2266 Chipping Campden 23 42 Crane Quarry 22 35 Crickley Hill 2 7, 8 Foss Cross Quarry 10 11; 1722; 1940; 2025-27 Hampen Railway Cutting 13 7 Hobbs Quarry 17 23; 19 36 Land Grove Quarry 8 7 Minchinhampton Quarries 22 34 Newnham Quarry 20 32-33 Oakenhill Railway Cutting 22 66 Puddlebrook Quarry 20 35; 22 36 Staple Edge 19 32 Stenders Quarry 9 5 StrattonRoadQuarry 1011-12; 1813 The Quarry, Dursley 11 6; 1211; 1723 Wainlode Cliff 2246

Greater London

Charlton Sand Pit 11 11; 22 61 Hampstead Heath 8 11 Harefield Chalk Pit 10 11; 1314; 1418 Horsendon Hill 8 11 Lesnes Abbey Wood 3 1, 5; 2334

Hampshire

Barton Cliffs 9 3; 10 7; 20 49, 50; 21 23; 22 49 Bournemouth Cliffs 23 26 Downend Chalk Pit 23 28 Dunbridge 23 42 Farlington Redoubt" 1427 Hengistbury Head 23 26 Highcliffe - Milford Cliffs 13; 6 6 Langstone Harbour 8 6 New Forest 11 8 Woodgreen 2342

Hereford and Worcester

Birches Farm 9 6 Blaize Bailey Viewpoint 11 3 Castlemorton 12 13 Dumbleton Dingle 1425 Elmley Lovett Track Section 15 25 Forest of Dean 113,7; 1417; 1911; 2336 Gullet Quarry 1932; 2144; 2338-39, 47

51

Gullet Wood Quarry 19 33 Gurneys Quarry 32; 4 2, 3; 1939 Gurney Slade 20 29 Hartlebury Common 12 13; 1526 Hollybush Quarries 19 33 Hollybush Road Cutting 19 33 Ipsley Alders 11 8 Malvern 19 32; 20 35 Martins Shell Quarry 5 5 Mocktree Quarry 1215 Mortimer Forest 96; 11 1-2; 127, 8; 17 5; 199, 32, 57; 23

33 Rudge End Quarry 96; 1216 Staple Edge 23 36 Upper Hall Farm Quarry 3 2; 19 39 Whiteleaved Oak Quarry 1933

Hertfordshire

Pincents Kiln 23 36 Redbournbury Chalk Pit 10 7; 17 23 Waltham Cross 19 35

Humberside Cliff Farm Pit 22 62; 23 36 Elloughton Bypass 2 7 Spurn Head 21 28-31

Isle of Wight

Afton Down 22 50, 51 Bembridge 8 11 Brook Bay 22 50, 51 Chale Bay 19 28 Colwell Bay 1522; 1716 Priory Bay 23 42 Whitecliff Bay 23 28

Kent

Abbey Wood (Lesnes) 3 1, 5; 2334 Allington Quarry 22 64 Bakers Hole 12 15 Barnfield Pit 22 13-20 Bishopstone Cliffs (Herne Bay) 2019-21; 2133-34; 22

55 Camber Castle 19 40 Copt Point 94; 108 Dungeness 94; 1422; 1628; 1718,22; 1815, 16; 1920,

22-23; 20 45; 22 70; 23 38, 40 Folkestone Warren 1928 High Halstow 19 28 Holywell Coombe 23 30 Knockmill Pit 12 13 Limekiln Wood Chalk Pit 3 2; 4 3; 8 6 Pegwell Bay 1 3; 16 27 Ramsgate Harbour (Thanet Coast) 22 54, 55 Sevenoaks 19 28 Spot Lane Quarry 22 64 Swanscombe 22; 54; 13 13; 2348 Thanet Coast 2132-33; 2246-47 Warden Point 9 3; 10 7; 19 28

Lancashire

Clitheroe Reef Knolls 4 12 Pimbo Lane Brickworks 18 9, 10; 21 42 Ravenhead Brickworks 21 45 Rowley Tip 17 7, 25; 18 2 Salthill and Bellman Park Quarries 3 6; 10 6; 20 11-14;

2138 Skellow Clough 1 2

Leicestershire

Browns Hill Quarry 11 10; 19 34 Browns Hill Railway Cutting 11 10; 1934 Gipsy Lane Pit 15 24 Ives Head 18 20 ValeofBelvoirCoalfield 1213; 1719; 1816

Norfolk

Blakeney Esker 1424; 1939 Catton Grove Chalk Pit 2131,32 Moodesley Cliffs 1 2 Sidestrand - Trirningham Cliffs 3 4; 19 28; 23 29 West Rooton 10 12; 11 8, 13 13: 2338, 41 Wiveton Downs 19 39

Northamptonshire

Cowthick Quarry 19 15, 16; 2039, 40; 2257 Thrapston Station Quarry 20 37

Northumberland

Collywell Bay 1924,40; 2043-45; 2144; 2335 Greenleighton Quarry 1426 Tynemouth - Seaton Sluice 1924; 2043,45; 2144; 2335

Nottinghamshire

Creswell Crags 16 25 Kimberley Railway Cutting 1519; 1721; 2336

Oxfordshire

Ardley Cutting and Quarries 16 29 Aston Rowant 28; 8 4 Bletchingdon Quarries 20 34 Enslow Bridge Quarry 20 34 Eynsham Station Pit 22 37 Horsehay Quarries 20 24; 22 65 Kirtlington Quarry 19 9, 31 Littlemore Railway Cutting 23 33 Long Hanborough Pit 22 51, 52 Magdalen College Deer Park 22 37 Rock Edge Quarry 22 24 Sharps Hill Quarry 46; 137 Shellingford Crossroads Quarry 23 33 Shipton Cement Works 2034; 2141 Spratts Barn Farm Mine 4 5; 17 20 Stonesfield 17 20; 18 8; 19 8 Warren Farm 128 Woodeaton Quarry 1722; 2045; 2127 Woodperry Road Pit 26

52

Peak District

Castleton 22 48 Eldon Hill Quarry 22 48 Mam Tor 19 28

Shropshire

Ashes Hollow - Longmynd 13 15 Chatwall Fan'n Cutting 5 5; 7 7; 8 3 Comley Quarry 12 15 Doseley Quarry 7 6 Eaton Church Lane Cutting 10 9 Ercall Quarries 19 42; 20 25; 22 53 Granhams Moor Quarry 8 3 Hope Bowdler Road Cutting 3 1, 8; 8 3 Hope Mill Quarry 64; 83 Lincoln Hill 18 20 Lower Wood Brook Stream Section 83 Lye Stream 1934; 2034 Meadowtown Quarry 8 3 Millichope Stream Section 8 3 Mortimer Forest 9 6; 11 1-2; 12 7, 8; 17 5; 19 9, 32, 37; 23

33 Norbury Hill Quarry 2144 Sharpstones Hill Quarry 7 6 Sheinton Brook 18 20 Shelve Church New Exposure 5 5 Tasker Quarry 8 3 Upper Millichope Stream Section 12 17 Wenlock Edge 2047-48; 21 24-25; 2261; 2338,46 Wigmore Road 8 3 Wrekin 4 11; 19 42; 20 25; 22 53

Somerset

Brean Down 23 31 Burrington Combe 21 40-41; 23 36 Charterhouse Lead Orefield 22 42 Chilcompton Railway Cutting 20 29; 22 24; 23 33 Downhead Quarry 22 24 Ebbor Gorge 2 2; 11 3 Eastwater Cavern 23 12 Hapsford Bridge 17 8 Holwell Quarry and Brook 23; 1912; 2333,36 Kilmersdon Road Quarry 1 2; 18 3 Lower Writhlington Tip 22 39 Lusty Quarry 13 9 Marston Road Section 19 12 Mendip 2, 7; 19 11; 2029; 21 36, 40; 2224, 27, 42; 2333,

36,45 Milton Lane Section 20 29 Priddy 2312c 14 St Cuthberts Swallet 2312, 14 Stony Littleton 22 60; 23 36 Swildons Hole 23 12 Tedbury Camp Quarry 1912, 13,40; 2136; 2336 Vallis Vale 178; 189 Whatley Roadside Section 23 36 Westbury-Sub-Mendip Quarry 1937 Wookey Hole 2 2 Wurt Pit 1424; 1628

53

Staffordshire

Aqualate Mere 12 13

Suffolk

Benacre Ness 17 23 Creeting Hill 8 4 Easton Bavents Cliffs 21 35; 22 56 Little Cornard Brickpits 18 10 Orfordness 23 38-39 Red Crag, Levington 8 4

Surrey

Seale Chalk Pit 10 10 Upper Common 22 38 West Clandon Chalk Pit 2252 Worms Heath 94

Sussex

Peacehaven 1011 Rye Harbour 1423; 1924 Telscombe Cliffs 10 11

Tyne iind Wear

Fulwell Quarries 20 19 Newsham Colliery 18 3

Warwickshire

Boons Quarry 23 28 Broom Railway Cutting 23 42 Church Lawford 23 42 Coten End Quarry 16 23; 17 17 Crosshands Quarry 1526; 1717; 23 34 Griff Hill Quarry 22 54 Temple Grafton 20 55 Windmill Hill Oudkins) Quarry 1819;-1938 Wolston Sand and Gravel Pit 10 7,2125,26; 2244

West Midlands

Doultons Clay Pit Dudley 19 7, 31; 22 58 Leach Green Quarries 20 24 Rubery Cutting 20 24 Walsall Inlier 2 8 Wrens Nest 1 1; 22; 38; 54; 65; 10 5; 127; 14 15; 1723

Wiltshire

Chilmark Quarries 128 Dead Maid Quarry 19 37; 21 39 Dinton 2140 Docks Clay Pit 87; 96; 10 11; 2266 Fyfie1d Down 10 5; 2035-36 Great Quarry 1720-21 Lady Down Quarry 15 18 Okus Quarry 1 1; 46; 1515 Old Town Railway Cutting 1518 Swindon 1 3; 2 8 Town Gardens Quarries 11; 1515-16

Upper Chicksgrove Pit 15 18 West Harnharn Chalk Pit 2042; 2245-46

Yorkshire - North, West and South

Ashfield Brick Pit 14 18; 1628 Cracoe Reef Knolls 10 10; 12 16 Craven Pennines 4 1 Flarnborough Head 6 5 Gristhorpe Bay 8 9 Hackness Head Pit 6 4 Hackness Rock Pit 6 4 Ingleborough 2 4; 78 Micklefield Quarry 44; 1935; 2269 Norber Erratics, Ingleborough 24; 78 Quarry Moor 2 1, 3 Ravenscar 6 3 South Elrnsall Quarry 86; 1313; 2027; 219, 10; 2336 Stairfoot Brickworks 11 11 Victoria Cave 89

Scotland

Argyll and Bute

Laggan Bay, Islay 22 69

Banff and Buchan

Findon 109

Berwickshire

Foulden 18 11 St Abbs Head 12 15 Whiteadder River 20 28

Caitlmess ,

Achanarras Quarry 172; 1812; 195,31 Banniskirk Quarry 18 19 Keiss Links 16 27 Niandt 18 19-20 Spittal Quarry 22 26 Weydale Quarry 2 1, 3

City of Edinburgh

Granton Shrimp-Bed 22 3-8; 23 49

Cunningharne

Arran 95; 12 18; 2334 Trearne Quarry 16 26

Clydesdale

Birk Knowes 133; 1628; 21 41, 42 Carstairs Kames 10 8; 20 28 Podowrin Burn 196 Ravengill 18 20

Dumbarton

Glenarbuck 141

East and Mid Lothian

Knock Quarries 18 20 North Esk Reservoir 16 24 Petershill Reservoir Quarry 16 22; 18 20; 2269

Gordon

Rhynie Chert Locality 18 3

Inverness

Ben Wyvis 18 18 Cairngorms 1818; 1918; 2037-39

Kyle and Carrick

CraigheadQuarry 1718; 1817, 18; 1920-21; 2048; 21 24

Lochaber

Cairngorms see Inverness Glen Roy 54; 11 3; 14 17; 213-8; 2339 Parallel Roads of Lochaber 17 6; 21 3; 23 39 Rhum 1622 Strontian Lead Mine 21 45

Moray

Cutties Hillock Quarry 21 39

Nairn

Kildrumrnie Kames 10 8

Orkney and Shetland Isles

Cruaday Quarry 172 Ronas Hill 8 10 St Ninians Tombol0 8 10; 1723

Perth and Kinross

Middlemause Esker 17 23

Renfrew

Boyleston Quarry 1526; 1624; 17 17

Ross and Cromarty

Achnasheen Karne Terraces 10 8; 12 11 Beinn Eighe 71,4 Morrich More 23 24, 39

Skye and Lochalsh

Quirang 19 28 Rudh' An Eireannaich 4 1, 7 Skye 11 7 Suisnish 157 The Storr 19 28

64

Stewartry

Southerness Coast 18 20

Stirling

Lime Craig Quarry 20 31; 21 38-39

Sutherland

Knockan Cliff, Inverpolly 5 3; 10 5 Loch Borralan 20 33-34

Westem Isles

Machair Robach 2027-28

Wigtown

Luce Sands (Torrs Warren) 2247-48

Wales

Clwyd

Cynwyd Forest 20 31 Ogof Dydd Byraf 8 5; 9 2

Dyfed

Abereiddi Bay 21 46 Gasworks Lane Section 1938 Llanfallteg Railway Cutting 16 3 West Angle Bay 63

Gwynedd

Non Bryn-Llin-Fawr 15 18; 162 Carmel Head 10 11 Great Open Cast, Parys Mountain 23 32 Great Ormes Head 19 40 Llandwyn Island 22 64 Newborough Warren 7 7 Ogof Ddu 19 36 Wern Road Cutting 1936

Mid Glamorgan

Merthyr Mawr Warren 1626 Southerndown Coast 15 23; 16 27; 17 21

Powys

Brecon 74 Cwrn Craig-Ddu 1821 Dulas Brook (Brynsadwrn Bridge) 2026; 21 34 Neath and Mellte 1426 OgofFfynnon Ddu 71,4; 94; 10 3

South Glamorgan

Penarth Coast 22 67 Severn 1926 Sully Island 23 28

West Glamorgan

Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen 17 24 Oxwich 1427 Swansea Bypass 2 7 Taffs Well Gorge 8 11

Geological index

Geomorphology

Caves and Karst

22; 53; 74,6; 85,9; 92,4; 113; 1217; 1315, 16; 1424; 15 9; 1723; 1937; 21 43; 2240,48, 59; 23 12,39

Coastal

86; 93,4; 118; 1214, 17; 1311, 14; 1422-24,27; 1528; 16 26-28; 1718,22,23; 1815 -16, 21; 1920,22-24,26; 2027, 45; 2128; 2247,70; 2324,26,38-41

Glacial and periglacial

34; 54; 65; 74,8; 84; 107, 8, 12; 11 3, 8, 9; 12 11, 15; 13 11, 13; 14 17, 25, 26; 1525; 168,23,25; 17 15, 23; 18 17; 19 18,35, 39; 2028,37; 21 3, 25, 35, 39, 42, 45; 2238; 2329,34, 39

Mass movement

1927; 2334

Rivers

113,7-8

Pollen

2141; 2237

Ma

1810

Igneous petrology

44, 7; 76, 7; 88; 95; 109, 10; 11 10; 12 17; 14 18; 159, 25, 26; 1612,22,24; 1717; 189,20; 198,24,33,40; 20 14, 31, 33,43; 2140,45; 2254, 64; 2334, 35

Mineralogy

44; 10 9; 11 10; 12 17; 15 24; 20 14, 46; 21 26, 45; 22 42; 23 32-33,36

Palaeontology

Palaeobotany

45; 66; 87; 10 9; 1525; 16 10,28; 177, 10,20,21; 188; 19 8,9,34; 2028,35; 2141; 2236: 2330,40

55

53

Invertebrate palaeontology

13; 35; 45: 55; 63-4,6; 87; 10 10-11; 12 15; 1423; 1524; 1624,29; 179, 17-18,24; 187,10-11,17; 1915, 19,27,34; 2023,31,33-35; 2127, 31-32, 38, 40-41, 46; 223,24,33-34, 37, 39, 51, 63, 69; 2330, 31, 34, 40

Vertebrate palaeontology

13; 23; 3 5; 45; 66; 8 7; 109; 1523-24; 1623; 173, 17,20: 188, 10-12; 195, 8-9, 29; 2032, 34; 21 39, 41, 46; 2229, 36, 37; 2325,31,34,40

Stratigraphy

Precambrian - Lewisian

53; 115

Precambrian - Torridonian

53; 115

Precambrian - Moine

Precambrian - Dalradian

11 5; 2031

Precambrian - England and Wales

3 8; 4 11; 76, 7; 18 19-20; 19 32-33, 38, 42; 20 25, 33, 35; 21 44; 2264; 2328

Cambrian

4 11; 53; 89; 184; 1933, 36, 38, 42; 2024-25, 35; 2253

Ordovician

38; 55; 64; 77; 88; 92; 10 9; 152; 17 18; 18 17; 1920, 36; 2014,24,31,48; 2124, 38, 45; 2346

Silurian

11; 22,5,8; 32; 42-3,11; 54,5; 64,5; 10 5,9-10; 111, 12; 127, 15-17: 1415; 165; 1723-24; 1820; 199,32-33,36-39; 2025; 2134, 41, 44; 2258,61; 2333,38,46

Devonian

23; 46; 87; 9 1, 5; 12 15; 1523; 189, 12; 195, 8, 34, 40; 20 31,34; 2138, 39; 2325

Carboniferous

27; 36; 412; 63; 8 10; 91,5; 10 6,10; 119, 11-12; 1212-13, 15; 1310, 12, 14: 1418,22,26; 152, 19,23-25; 166, 12,22, 24-25,28; 177, 17, 19,21,24; 189, 11, 16; 197, 12,24,40; 2011, 14, 18,21,28-29,31-32,35; 2134, 36, 38, 40, 42, 45, 47; 2236,39,58,60-61, 63, 65-66, 69; 2327,35,49

Penno-Triassic

23; 34; 44; 72; 86, 9, 10, 12; 11, 9, 11; 12 12; 13 10, 13; 14 18,22; 1519,23-25; 1612,23,25,28; 178, 17,21; 189, 19;

199,35; 2014, 19,23,27,29; 21 9, 39, 40; 2246,60-65,67, 69; 2328,34

Jurassic

1 1-2; 2 6-8; 3 4-5; 4 5-6; 5 5; 6 4, 5; 7 3, 5; 8 7, 9; 10 6, 9, 11-12; 116, 10-11; 128, 11-12; 137,9,14; 154,15,18-19, 23, 26; 1629; 178-9, 17, 20, 23; 188-11, 13; 198-9, 12, 15, 27,34,40; 2016,23-25,29,32,34-35,37,39,45-46; 21 26-27,31, 36, 39, 40-41, 46; 2224,34,44,46,57,60,62, 65-67; 23 26, 33, 34

Cretaceous

13; 2 8; 3 2, 4; 4 3; 6 5; 8 4, 6-8; 9 4; 10 5, 7-8, 10-11; 12 12; 13 10, 14; 14 18, 26, 27: 158, 18, 19; 1627; 18 10; 1937; 20 42, 45; 21 31-32, 39; 22 45-46, 50, 52, 54, 61; 23 28-29, 33

Tertiary

13;35;66;87;93,4; 107, 11; 1111-12; 1212-13; 13 10-11,14; 1418,22,25; 159,19,22,25; 1622,24,27; 1710, 16-17, 19; 2043,49; 2123, 33; 2230,38,49,54-55,61; 23 24,28, 31, 34

Quaternary

12; 22; 34; 54; 63; 84; 118; 13 13; 1422, 25; 1525; 168, 23-25, 27; 17 5, 15, 17; 18 6, 10; 19 35, 37, 39; 21 25, 35, 39, 41,42; 2213, 15,36-38,44,51,54,56,64; 2329 -31, 34, 42, 48

Structure and metamorphism

see also Stratigraphy - Precarnbrian

10 11; 1426; 2258; 2333

Subject index

Afforestation

54;1426

Coastal development

13; 24; 34; 66; 86; 93; 10 7-8,11-12; 118-9; 1311; 1425; 1522,25; 1623,26-27; 1715-16,21; 1821,24-27; 1940; 20 19,49; 2123, 28, 31-33, 35, 45; 2246,49,50,54-56,67; 23 24-26, 28-31

Commissioned research

2338-41

Conservation trusts

22, 3; 3 1, 5, 8; 53; 65; 8 1; 95; 10, 9-10; 11 9, 10, 12; 12 15-17; 1314, 16; 1418,27; 1519; 1721; 184, 13, 16,36; 19 38; 2019,21,48; 21 19,24,26,28,34,43,44; 2234,60,66; 2331,35,36

56

Field education

22,9; 3 7; 52-3; 62-3, 5; 94-5; 10 1, 3, 5-6; 113, 6-7, 9; 12 8-9, 12; 1313, 14, 16; 1415, 17-18,24; 1519,24; 1622,26, 29; 1712,24-25; 1819,23; 1932,37,41-43; 2025,28,50; 21 36,38; 22 13, 23, 27, 58, 60-61; 2340, 44, 46, 48-49

Fieldwork surveys ,

24; 3 3, 6; 4 8-9; 76; 10 1

Geological conservation - international

4 9; 5 2; 8 1; 12 2; 13 1; 22 9

GCR excavations

22; 54; 161,3; 176-10; 189-11; 199,34-37; 2028,31-35; 2139-42, 46; 2234,36-38, 57; 2336, 42

GCR publication

2321

GCR selection

14; 34; 72,6; 810-11; 91-2; 10 3-4; 115; 1210; 138; 1414; 151; 165; 173; 184; 20 15; 2229; 23 19

Landfill

23; 32,6; 42-5; 65; 75; 10 7, 11-12; 116,9-11; 1212-13; 139-10, 13-15; 14 18, 22, 24, 26; 1523-25; 1623-25, 28-29; 1717-18,22-23; 189, 17, 19; 1915,20,38,40; 20 19, 23j5, 27, 32, 39, 45, 48; 21 9, 24-25, 27, 31, 45; 22 44, 48, 52, 54, 64-67, 69; 23 25, 28, 32-34, 40

Limestone pavements

32; 43; 74, 5; 8 9; 10 9; 11 3; 16 16

Mineral extraction

36; 52, 5; 62; 72, 12; 85, 6; 92-4; 10 8; 12 11, 14, 16; 13 11-12,14-15; 1423-24,26; 1524; 1719,23; 1816; 1922,24, 37,39,40; 2025,27-28,45,47; 21 24, 45, 48; 2254,66; 69; 23 14, 26, 28, 32

Pipelines

12; 29; 37, 10; 4 13; 68; 7 11, 14; 1217; 1427; 1626-27

Public Inquiries

13; 3 2; 4 2-3; 6 5; 73; 8 5-6; 9 2-3; 10 7-8; 11 6; 12 11-12; 13 9-10; 1422; 1522-23; 1623-24; 1715-18; 1815-17; 1915, 18-19; 2037, 39-40, 42-43, 45-49; 21 23-27; 2244-49

Regional reports

810, 11; 10 6; 114; 129, 10; 138; 141, 19; 1521

Road construction

13; 26-8; 37,8; 42, 11-13; 67; 78-9; 84, 12; 1425; 1625; 2025; 2134; 2250, 54; 2329

57

Site adoption

38; 83; 13 14; 14 18; 21 43; 2223-24, 60; 2333, 36

Site access

1 1, 2; 2 3, 9; 3 5; 4 7; 5 4, 5; 7 5-7; 8 3, 6; 9 5; 10 9-11; 11 3, 9-12; 1215-17; 1312; 1723-24; 1811-13, 19-21; 1939-40; 20 14, 21, 25, 32, 35; 21 40, 44-45, 48; 22 25, 39, 61, 64, 66; 2333-35

Site clearance

1 1-2; 26; 35; 45-6; 54; 64,5; 11 1; 127-8, 15; 137, 13; 14 15,17-18; 1515,18-19,26; 1622; 1720-21,23; 188-10,13; 198-9, 12, 32-35, 38; 20 24-25, 29, 31-33, 35, 37; 21 36, 38-39, 40, 42, 46; 22 24, 60, 62, 66, 69; 23 33

Site conduct

12; 2 5; 35,8; 46, 7; 54-5; 63-4; 77-8; 89; 95; 10 9, 10; 11 12; 1215, 16, 18; 133, 15; 1724; 1820,21; 1938,40; 21 44-45; 2264; 2334

SSSI notification

2323

Water works

73; 10 10; 118; 1817; 2263; 2327

Featured articles Listed chronologically according to issue number.

Geological conservation in Northern Ireland 7 13-14 Geological conservation in Shropshire 8 1-3 Geological conservation in the Netherlands 122-6 Conservation of geological localities within the Oslo Region, Norway 13 1-2 Reflections on the code for geological fieldwork 13 4-6 Progress with the National Scheme for Geological Site Documentation 149-12 Britain before Man - a new major exhibit in the Geological Museum, London 1412-14 The Institution of Geologists 15 11-14 Underground storage of hydrocarbons and conservation 15 14-15 Quarrying v conservation - a continuing conflict? 16 13-16 Limestone pavements - a biologist's view 16 16-18 An information source for planning fieldwork - IGS 16 18-21 The commercial exploitation of geological sites - NCC's response 17 1-3 The development of fieldwork resources at Bristol City Museum 17 10-12 Britain's tip heaps - an unlikely subject for conservation? 18 2-4 The safety of geology students in the field 18 13-14 Geological Society of London establishes a Conservation Commlttee 18 14-15 The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 - implications for earth science conservation 19 12-14 Scientific conservation as a minority interest - Chesil Beach 20 2-10 Salthill Quarry SSSI, Clitheroe, Lancashire - geology goes to town 20 11-14 Glen Roy 21 3-8 National Stone Centre 21 11-16 Record of the Rocks - an introduction to the National Scheme for Geological Site Documentation 21 17-22

The Granton shrimp-bed, Edinburgh: crustaceans, conodonts and conservation 223-8 Conservation of geological features in the USA 22 9-12 The geology and archaeology of Barrifield Pit 22 15-20 Caves and cave sediments - a challenge for conservation 22 40-42 Mendip lead mining - the Charterhouse Lead orefield 2242-43 Earth science in the NCC 23 7-8 Conserving geological sites - the significance of the Wildlife and Countryside Act for geological conservation 23 9-12

Cave SSSIs and the Priddy case 23 12-14 NAMHO - profile of the mining historians' association 23 16-18

Earth science publications from the Nee

Geology teaching trails

pagespnce

Wren's Nest NNR geological trail 24pp 15p Wren's Nest NNR geolOgical handbook 24pp 20p Staple Edge geology teaching trail

booldet 28pp 60p Staple Edge geology teaching trail

student's worksheet (x3) 15p Salthill Quarry geology trail 28pp 60p Mortimer Forest geological trail 28pp 50p Burrator Dartmoor landform trail 24pp £1.50 Wenlock Edge geology teaching trail 24pp £1.50

Field-guides

Tertiary Igneous Rocks of Rhum (GH. Emeleus and RM Forster, 1979) 44pp 60p

New sites for old: A student's guide to the geology of the east Mendips (edited by K.L, Duff; A.P, McKirdy and M]. Harley, 1985) 192pp £8,50

Earth science conservation

A limited number of back issues of Earth science conservation numbers 1 to 22 (1968-1985) are available free of charge direct from the Earth Science DiVlsion. Numbers 1 to 14 were originally issued under the title Information circular. Back issues of number 23 are also available, cost HO 0

Information leaflets

Practical geological conservation

Priced items are available post free from Publications, NCC Peterborough Payments should be made by cheque or postal order payable to the Nature Conservancy Councll. Unpriced items are available free of charge from the Earth Science Division at the same address

Latest publications

Burrator Dartmoor landform trail

The distinctive landscape of Dartmoor is dominated by tors - bare rocky outcrops which contrast starkly with the smooth rolling moors in which they stand, The trail explores this scenery At selected locations, questions stimulate detailed observation and interpretation, The questions highlight field evidence which, together with subsequent discussion within the text, encourage the user to construct at least a partial explanation of the origins and evolution of this landscape,

Wenlock Edge geology teaching trail For many years, the quarries along Wenlock Edge were a focus for geological field study as they provided magnificent sections through the Silurian reef limestones of the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation (Wenlock Series). Unfortunately, many of these faces are no longer accessible,

This trail guide describes a number of good alternative exposures suitable for educational fieldwork, particularly in 'A' level and undergraduate courses, The sites, which all lie on the wooded escarpment of Wen'lock Edge, demonstrate vertical and lateral variations in fauna and lithology,

Acknowledgements

Photographs of Holywell Coombe were supplied by Q. A. Photos Ltd,

The photograph of Gaping Ghyll was supplied by John Forder.

58 59

The Nature Conservancy Council is the body responsible for advising Government on nature conservation in Great Britain. It's work includes the selection, establishment and management of National Nature Reserves; the selection and management of Marine Nature Reserves; the identification and notification of Sites of Special Scientific Interest; the provision of advice and dissemination of knowledge about nature conservation; and the support and conduct of research relevant to these functions.

This is one of a range of publications published by thE; Interpretive Services Branch. A catalogue listing current titles is available from Dept. ESC, Nature Conservancy Council, Northminster House, Peterborough PEI I UA.

\ju NKfURE

CONSERVANCY COUNCIL

ISSN 0142-2324 © NCC 1988 Published by Interprettve Services Branch